William Schaper

Introduction

William Schaper was a General Subjects Teacher at Eltham College Junior School in London, where he had worked for more than two decades before a misconduct case ended his career. In January 2025 the school’s internet filtering system flagged potential inappropriate material accessed by Schaper, and the investigation that followed revealed he had used a school device to view pornographic websites on multiple occasions during school hours, had stored sexually explicit content in his school email account since around 2018, and had tried to cover his tracks by deleting his browser history. When confronted by the Acting Headteacher, he initially denied it before partially admitting it hours later by message. A professional conduct panel of the Teaching Regulation Agency found all allegations proved in September 2026, and on behalf of the Secretary of State he was prohibited from teaching indefinitely.

Background Information

Schaper began his employment at Eltham College Junior School on 1 September 2003 and remained there as a General Subjects Teacher for over twenty years. The panel noted that he had “a long record as a teacher” with evidence of involvement in extracurricular activities, and a witness was complimentary about his abilities as an educator. No doubt was cast on his teaching ability, and the panel accepted he could make a valuable contribution to the profession. He had no previous regulatory or disciplinary findings against him, and a character reference described his conduct as “out of character”.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

On 13 January 2025, a test conducted on the school’s internet filtering and monitoring system identified potential inappropriate material accessed by Schaper. He attended a meeting with the Acting Headteacher on 17 January 2025, where he initially denied accessing the material. The school held a disciplinary hearing on 24 January 2025 and referred him to the Teaching Regulation Agency on 6 February 2025.

The panel considered allegations in a notice of meeting dated 8 June 2026 and found every one proved, largely on Schaper’s own admissions and a signed statement of agreed facts. It found that from in or around December 2024 to January 2025 he accessed, or attempted to access, pornographic websites on a school device, on school grounds and during school hours, with the internet activity report showing the websites visited, the location of access, the device used and the times, on multiple occasions throughout the day. He also attempted to conceal this access by manually deleting his browser internet history, having clicked on pornographic links and then taken advice from an unidentified individual on how to hide it.

Further findings covered a longer span. From in or around 2018, Schaper stored sexually explicit content in his school Outlook 365 account, a fact confirmed by a technical explanation in the investigative report referring to several different websites. On or around 17 January 2025 he initially denied having accessed pornographic websites on a school device, a denial recorded in the meeting notes and further undermined by a WhatsApp message in which he made a partial admission to the Acting Headteacher that evening. The panel found his conduct in accessing and storing the material was sexual by its very nature, applying the definition in section 79 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003.

The panel also found the concealment and denial dishonest and lacking in integrity. Applying the legal test from Ivey v Genting Casinos [2017] UKSC 67, the panel noted that at the 17 January meeting Schaper had stated he “wouldn’t do this sort of thing” and had provided a complex and misleading account directly contrary to the forensic findings of the school investigation, before confessing by WhatsApp message that evening. It drew the inference that he had intentionally been dishonest when concealing his access and when asked about it directly. While acknowledging he was “not expected to be a paragon of virtue”, the panel held that acting contrary to expected standards and disregarding school policies was an explicit indication of conduct lacking in integrity. The panel found the conduct amounted to both unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, and was not persuaded by his position that no children ever walked in on him, noting this did not detract from the potential safeguarding risks.

Public Reaction and Consequences

The case was decided without a hearing: the TRA agreed to Schaper’s request that the allegations be considered on the papers, and he admitted unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute in a signed statement of agreed facts dated 8 May 2026. The panel, chaired by lay panellist Mr Richard Young, found a strong public interest in declaring and upholding proper standards of conduct given his deliberate concealment of his use of school resources to access pornographic material, and warned that public confidence in the profession could be seriously weakened if such conduct were not treated with the utmost seriousness. Weighing his long teaching record against the repeated conduct and his dishonesty, it concluded the public interest outweighed his interests and recommended a prohibition order with immediate effect.

Current Status

On 15 September 2026 the panel’s recommendation was put into effect by decision maker Stuart Blomfield, acting on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education, who agreed that a prohibition order was proportionate and in the public interest. Schaper 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 prohibition order to be set aside, but not before 24 September 2028, two years from the date of the order at the earliest. This is not an automatic right — a panel will consider any application, and without a successful one he remains prohibited indefinitely.

Impact on Their Career/Life

A career spanning more than two decades at a single school ended with the January 2025 referral and the September 2026 prohibition order. The panel acknowledged the consequences of prohibition were severe and that a period beyond two years before review would be disproportionate, but found his insight was likely still developing and the risk of repetition remained present. The decision maker gave less weight to his contribution to the profession, judging it necessary to impose the order to maintain public confidence. Unless he successfully applies to set the order aside after 24 September 2028, his removal from the classroom is permanent.

Sources

• Department for Education, “Teacher misconduct panel outcome: Mr William Schaper” — source