Teacher in Buckinghamshire banned for sending pupil 'sexual messages'
Sayyad Rizvi was head of chemistry at Stantonbury School in Milton Keynes.
A teacher in Buckinghamshire has been banned from the profession for sending one of his pupils ‘sexual messages’.
Sayyad Rizvi previously worked at Stantonbury School in Milton Keynes, which caters for students in years 7-11 and also has a sixth form.
A panel of the Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) decided to ban the 40-year-old for life after he admitted messaging a student, ‘U r good looking and gorgeous’.
The teacher denied sending her other texts, including asking her to undress, requesting to give her a massage, calling her ‘sexy’ and sharing a link to a porn website.
The TRA panel convened in November to consider the case heard from three witnesses and Mr Rizvi, who was not represented by a lawyer.
Mr Rizvi started working at the school, which falls under the Tove Learning Trust, in September 2017, before completing his teaching qualification in 2018, becoming a chemistry teacher, and eventually head of chemistry in 2021.
During the Covid-19 pandemic, the teacher set up a chemistry channel on social media called ‘Quinone7’ to provide online chemistry resources.
The school was aware of this.
He also used a marketing team in Pakistan to help him promote the accounts to boost his number of followers.
On August 12th, a parent complained to the school Mr Rizvi had been messaging her daughter on Instagram through his ‘Quinone7’ account and had sent pictures of himself and other images of naked or semi-naked people.
The panel heard the teacher claimed his social media had been hacked after he lost his phone while abroad in Pakistan.
This was after he learned parents at the school had spoken about his messages to the student on a Facebook page.
A witness told the panel they received a message from the teacher explaining he was in Pakistan to visit his parents.
Two weeks later, Mr Rizvi was suspended from work to allow the school and police to conduct their initial investigations.
In October of that year, the teacher was told the school would conduct a formal investigation, while the police would take no further action.
At a November investigation meeting, Mr Rizvi confirmed his Instagram conversation with ‘Pupil A’ had started on August 7th, before he was allegedly hacked.
A disciplinary hearing in May 2023, delayed due to Mr Rizvi’s ill health, resulted in him being dismissed, a decision which was upheld at appeal, before the case was passed to the TRA.
Mr Rizvi told the panel the girl, who he had taught for around two years, messaged him to say ‘she was worried about failing her chemistry exam’, to which he replied: “U r good looking and gorgeous.”
He claimed this was to reassure her, following the end of her relationship, but in hindsight admitted he was aware he should not have engaged in such a conversation but was suffering ill health at the time.
The teacher claimed this was the only message he sent the pupil and that the others via his phone were not by him.
He told the panel how he suspected his Pakistani marketing team, but later thought the messages were sent by someone who had taken his phone as part of a family feud.
Mr Rizvi’s phone was allegedly seen in the hands of his cousin, who the teacher said did not speak English, but had some level of written ability.
The panel said Mr Rizvi was more likely than not to have sent the other messages ‘on the balance of probabilities’ and considering the evidence presented to it.
It also found Mr Rizvi’s actions were ‘aimed at seeking sexual gratification’, a charge he denied, claiming that ‘within his culture’, calling someone ‘gorgeous’ was ‘normal and appropriate’.
The panel said: “The conduct of Mr Rizvi in relation to all of the allegations amounted to misconduct of a serious nature which fell significantly short of the standards expected of the profession, and thereby was unacceptable professional conduct.”
It added that Mr Rizvi intended to return to teaching, although there was no evidence to show he was currently working in the profession.
The panel said a ban from teaching can be appropriate in cases of an abuse of trust or sexual misconduct, among other behaviours.
It also noted mitigating factors in the case, including Mr Rizvi’s ‘previous good history’ and character references, which ‘spoke very highly in terms of his teaching practice’.
However, it also considered aggravating factors, including that he tried to conceal his actions, mostly expressed remorse for himself and his career, and tried to ‘blame Pupil A for sending ‘baiting messages’.
The panel said an indefinite ban was ‘proportionate and appropriate’ and prohibited Mr Rizvi from teaching in any institution, with no provision for a review.
The teacher has the right to appeal the decision, which was made on November 20th.