First published April 26, 2021.
Richard Glenn, a senior teacher at Longridge Towers School in Northumberland, was banned from teaching in England in April 2021 after a sixth-form trip to Costa Rica in which he drank heavily with pupils and took some of them to a strip club. The order is indefinite. He was given the right to ask for a review after three years, but that review is not automatic and the ban does not simply run out.
The case drew national attention because of the strip club detail, yet the official decision is more useful than the headlines. It sets out exactly what went wrong, why a panel treated it as serious misconduct, and what "banned for three years" really means under the rules for teachers in England.
The short version: what happened and what the order means
Glenn admitted every allegation put to him by the Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA), the body that investigates serious misconduct by teachers in England. A professional conduct panel met on 7 April 2021 and recommended a prohibition order. A senior official, Alan Meyrick, accepted that recommendation on behalf of the Education Secretary on 8 April 2021.
The decision states plainly: "Mr Richard Glenn is prohibited from teaching indefinitely." That bars him from teaching in any school, sixth-form college, relevant youth accommodation or children's home in England. He could apply to have the order set aside no earlier than 16 April 2024, and a fresh panel would have to agree before he could return. He also had 28 days to appeal to the High Court.
Many early reports described the outcome as a three-year ban after which he could teach again. That is not correct. Three years is only the minimum wait before he may ask.
The Costa Rica trip in July 2019
The trip took place from 5 to 11 July 2019. It was a sixth-form expedition run by an external travel company, and the pupils were aged 16 to 18. Glenn was Head of Sixth Form and taught computer science; he was also the only member of the school's own staff on the trip. A woman employed by the expedition company acted as trip leader.
Longridge Towers is an independent school near Berwick-upon-Tweed. The BBC reported at the time that day places cost around £4,850 a term. Parents paying for a trip of this kind expect the teacher in charge to be the responsible adult who keeps their children safe in an unfamiliar country, and that expectation runs through the panel's reasoning.
According to reports of the hearing, his behaviour became so concerning that he was sent home before the expedition ended. The school later referred the matter to the regulator.
What the panel found proven
The published decision lists the allegations Glenn accepted. In plain terms, he:
- drank alcohol with pupils on more than one occasion;
- let pupils under 18 drink alcohol;
- while drunk, made threatening or inappropriate remarks to pupils, including threats to kick one pupil's head in and to kill another, and told a pupil he would be in trouble while implying he himself would not;
- approached one pupil aggressively, grabbed his head and kissed his forehead;
- took pupils to a strip club;
- was aggressive towards the female trip leader when she tried to help him back to his tent;
- exposed his naked body to the trip leader in a hotel room they were sharing.
Both sides agreed that the strip club visit and the hotel room incident were neither malicious nor sexually motivated, and the panel accepted that. Glenn said he could not remember parts of the trip because he was so intoxicated, but he did not dispute what witnesses described.
The panel concluded that this conduct put the pupils in his care at risk. Its report observed that he had been "under the influence of alcohol, and therefore not in a position to adequately take decisions or act in loco parentis". That Latin phrase, meaning "in the place of a parent", is the heart of the matter: on an overseas trip the teacher stands in for the parents, day and night.
Why the ban is indefinite rather than three years
Prohibition orders in England are always indefinite. What the decision maker controls is whether the teacher may apply for a review and, if so, how soon. The minimum review period is two years; in the most serious cases, such as sexual misconduct involving children, no review is allowed at all.
In Glenn's case the panel weighed several points in his favour. He had a good record, including earlier residential trips that passed without incident. He cooperated fully, admitted what he could, showed remorse and, in the panel's words, considerable insight into his behaviour. Colleagues, former colleagues and former pupils wrote positive character references, and he had taken steps to deal with the problems behind his conduct.
Against that, the panel found no sign that he had acted under duress or that his actions were anything other than deliberate. Drinking with teenagers, threatening them and taking them to an adult venue went to the core of what parents trust a teacher to do. The result was a middle path: a permanent order with the door to a review left open after three years.
How teacher misconduct cases work in England
When a school or other body believes a teacher may have committed serious misconduct, it can refer the case to the TRA, an executive agency of the Department for Education. Most cases are filtered out early. Those that go forward are heard by a professional conduct panel of three people, usually including a teacher and a lay member.
The panel decides whether the facts are proven, whether they amount to "unacceptable professional conduct" or conduct that could bring the profession into disrepute, and whether a prohibition order is in the public interest. It then makes a recommendation. A senior civil servant takes the final decision, and the outcome is published on GOV.UK, which is why the details of this case are public.
A prohibition order applies across England. Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland have their own teaching regulators, which can take their own action.
Lessons for schools that run overseas trips
The case is a useful reminder for anyone planning an expedition with young people. A few practical points stand out:
- Never rely on a single member of staff. Glenn was the school's only adult on the trip. A second teacher would have provided a check on behaviour and a backup if one adult became unfit to supervise.
- Set a clear alcohol policy for staff. Many schools ban staff drinking entirely while on duty with pupils, because on a residential trip the duty never really stops.
- Agree the rules for older pupils in advance. Sixth formers may be legal adults at home or abroad, but the trip has its own rules. Parents and pupils should know them before departure.
- Make escalation easy. The trip leader and other adults need to know who to call at the school, day or night, if a staff member's conduct becomes a concern.
For parents, it is reasonable to ask a school how many of its own staff will travel, what the staff alcohol rule is and how incidents will be reported. A well-run school will have clear answers.
Sources: GOV.UK: Teacher misconduct panel outcome, Mr Richard Glenn (April 2021); Teaching Regulation Agency: full prohibition decision (PDF). Header image: Thinking Humanity.
COMMENTS