Geography Teacher Indefinitely Barred After Sending Money and Fast Food to Students
A geography teacher has been permanently banned from the profession after admitting to sending £500 to a former pupil and spending £1,000 on fast food for vulnerable students. Roger Towersey, 37, accepted his actions amounted to unacceptable professional conduct that could bring disrepute to teaching.
Social Media Messages and Financial Transfers
Between October 2023 and April 2024, Mr Towersey sent multiple social media messages to a former student. The Teaching Regulation Agency panel heard he transferred money to her between March 28 and April 10, 2024, totaling £500. In one TikTok message, he warned her about the source of funds, joking they might think she was dealing or doing OnlyFans.
Another message read: "Don't be getting anything too nice, I don't want to be responsible for either of you pulling and accidently getting pregnant." Bank statements confirmed the payments, including one instance where he sent £20 after she requested £4.
Fast Food Expenditure and School Access
The TRA also found Mr Towersey allowed two other pupils to access Ditton Park Academy in Slough, Berkshire, during weekends, spent time alone with them, and provided snacks. He spent approximately £1,000 on food delivery apps like Just Eat for these vulnerable students, which the panel deemed highly inappropriate.
A significant factor in the ban was his failure to report that the children told him they were hungry and cold. During an internal school meeting in April 2024, Mr Towersey admitted messaging the former pupil was beyond his remit but claimed he forgot she was a former student and wanted to ensure she had someone to talk to.
Professional Consequences and Teacher's Defense
Mr Towersey was banned indefinitely on March 3, 2026, prohibiting him from teaching in any school, sixth form college, youth accommodation, or children's home in England. He can apply for restoration of his eligibility in the future. In a written statement, he insisted his motivations were not nefarious or sinister, believing his actions had a net benefit academically for one pupil.
However, the panel concluded his conduct was clearly unprofessional, involving repeated attempts to gain an inappropriate level of familiarity with pupils. This case highlights strict professional boundaries in education and the serious consequences of misconduct.
