Fog on the road

‘Fog’ surrounding departure of Sandown Bay Principal

Following the recent news about the change of leadership at Sandown Bay Academy, it appears there is a fog surrounding the information released by AET, the Academy’s sponsor.

The school announced on 15th November that their Principal, Mrs Shaheen Khan Jones, who had not been seen at the Academy for weeks, was to leave their employment.

Principal did not resign
A spokesperson for AET told OnTheWight that following negotiations between them and Mrs Khan Jones’ representative – which concluded on 13th November (one day prior to AET telling OnTheWight that Mrs Khan Jones had been on extended leave) – her leaving date would be backdated to 31st October.

They also confirmed – twice – that she had not resigned from the post.

Contradictory statements
However, that directly contradicts the statement given to Isle of Wight Radio on 18th November by David Fuller, AET’s executive director for performance.

He told them,

“Mrs Khan Jones did resign from her post in the end and it’s well documented she has been working in Kent. That was without our knowledge.

“We were not surprised she resigned given the circumstances at Sandown but we were surprised she was working elsewhere.”

We asked why the two statements were so diametrically opposed and the spokesperson told OnTheWight,

“He [David Fuller] was wrong.”

Reason for departure
He went on to explain why Mrs Khan-Jones was asked to leave,

The lack of progress being made by the school since its full inspection, as detailed in Ofsted’s latest visit made public on 15 November, was a clear factor which brought about the need for a rapid change in leadership.”

Who’s telling the truth?
With both of these official AET voices saying directly contradicting things, who is to be believed?

Image: David Dolphin under CC BY 2.0

Advertisement
Subscribe
Email updates?
5 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Cynic
27, November 2013 11:10 am

Good reporting!

tryme
27, November 2013 1:23 pm

Perhaps the confusion over this is symptomatic of the problems they have been having more generally. Poor children & parents…

retiredhack
27, November 2013 1:28 pm

If I were Mrs K-J I’d be extremely angry about the public statements made by AET about her. It’s quite clear, in hindsight, that while saying she was on “extended leave”, they had, in fact, already sacked her and were in the process of appointing her successor. No amount of dancing on the head of a pin, which they’ve been doing ever since, is going to get… Read more »

John
27, November 2013 3:31 pm

One could read the various statement to indicate that the individual did not wish to resign, hence was advised to look for employment elsewhere and was given extended leave. A sacking could be messy, expensive, and time consuming, gathering evidence, if appealled. Upon securing employment elsewhere the individual may not have been in a hurry to notify the former employee, if they felt they had not been… Read more »

Stephen
27, November 2013 3:59 pm

I suspect John is on the right track regarding resignations and ‘gardening leave’. The big unknowns in this are; 1] the fine print in Ms K-J’s contract and 2] AET not wanting bad publicity over sacking an under-performing high profile employee. Such bad publicity might frighten the shareholders/investors/stakeholders at AET and those lovely folk at the Department of Education or whatever ‘whizzy’ name Comrade Gove is current… Read more »

reCaptcha Error: grecaptcha is not defined