A head of science who gave “inappropriate assistance” to her students during an assessment - and then covered up the fact that she had been sanctioned by the exam board - has been banned from teaching.
Chinenyem Maria-Rita Ocho was barred from teaching for a minimum of three years by the National College for Teaching and Leadership for her “dishonest” behaviour.
According to the panel, while working as head of science at the Cardinal Wiseman Catholic School, in Coventry, Ms Ocho gave pupils “scaffolding answers and a printout” to help them with their investigative skills assessment (ISA).
She admitted this amounted to “inappropriate assistance” and had resulted in a number of pupils writing “similar answers which were closely linked to example answers provided in the mark scheme”.
It was also in contravention of a declaration Ms Ocho had signed stating that the work was solely that of the pupil, conducted under conditions laid out in the AQA GCSE specification.
AQA raised concerns about the assessments in June 2015, and subsequently imposed restrictions on Ms Ocho’s involvement in examinations until after 2018, having concluded that she had provided inappropriate assistance.
In February 2016 Ms Ocho started new employment as head of science at Holy Trinity Catholic School, in Birmingham, when she was still under investigation by AQA. But she did not inform the school when the board formally imposed a sanction on her in March 2016.
The panel said that she had behaved with “dishonesty” and a “lack of integrity” by furnishing inappropriate assistance and then concealing her sanction.
She also subsequently failed to abide by the terms of the sanction by invigilating AQA controlled assessments, having keys for the area where the assessments were stored and accessing this facility.
These breaches meant that a number of students had to repeat their ISAs before of her involvement in the assessment process.
The panel found that Ms Ocho had been “dishonest in relation to two separate incidents and her dishonesty persisted over a number of years”.
However, it said her behaviour was at “the lower end of serious dishonesty”, her actions were committed “within the context of working in two very challenging school environments” and that she had not had similar issues at previous schools.
Ms Ocho had also admitted all of the allegations at the misconduct hearing, “having previously denied them” which demonstrated that she had “started to develop insight into the gravity of her actions, and their consequences”.
The panel recommended she be served with a prohibition order which could be reviewed after three years - a decision accepted by the education secretary’s representative.
