Bronwen James, the former PE teacher accused of engaging in sexual activity with a 16-year-old pupil, has told a court that she was immature when she began teaching and was more focused on being liked by her students than maintaining strict professional boundaries.
James, now 30, denies four counts of sexual activity with the teenager.
She was teaching PE at Bitterne Park School in Southampton, Hampshire, when the alleged offences are said to have taken place.
Giving evidence, James acknowledged that she did not believe she was a particularly good teacher at the beginning of her career and said she had not felt ready for the responsibilities that came with the job.
Former teacher admits she sought approval from pupils
James told jurors that although she had a strong interest in the subject she taught, she later realised that she had been looking for validation from the wrong people.
She described herself as “very lenient” and said she did not enforce some of the school’s behavioural rules as strictly as she should have.
According to her evidence, pupils were sometimes allowed to use their mobile phones or listen to music during coursework lessons if she believed it would help them complete their work.
James said her reluctance to upset students contributed to her approach.
She also acknowledged that she enjoyed being viewed favourably by pupils and regarded their enthusiasm about being placed in her lessons as a compliment.
Students’ praise was seen as a compliment
The court heard that James would sometimes be told by pupils that they preferred being taught by her rather than another teacher.
Asked about the importance of being popular with her students, she agreed it mattered to her.
James said she interpreted pupils’ excitement about having her as their teacher positively at the time, rather than recognising it as something that could create inappropriate boundaries between a teacher and those she taught.
She told the court that, as her career developed, she came to recognise that her approach to teaching had shortcomings.
Prosecution alleges meetings were arranged through Snapchat
The prosecution alleges that James developed an inappropriate relationship with the teenage pupil and subsequently took him to her home, where they allegedly had sex.
The boy has told the court that the pair arranged meetings through Snapchat and that they had sex at James’s house while watching Wimbledon.
He also alleged that she asked him to call her “Miss”.
James disputes the allegations and maintains that she did not engage in sexual activity with him.
Her defence is that the teenager was allegedly encouraged by another pupil to make the accusations.
Investigation began after messages appeared in pupil group chat
Jurors heard that the school’s investigation began after a screenshot containing messages between James and the teenager was circulated in a group chat involving around 30 to 40 pupils.
James was subsequently called to a meeting with the school’s head.
The court also heard that her initial account to police differed from evidence she later accepted.
She initially said the teenager had visited her address once but had never entered her home or car.
She later acknowledged that she had driven him home on one occasion.
Police find no Snapchat messages on her phone
Francesca Mason, the police officer involved in the investigation, told the court that an examination of James’s phone did not uncover evidence of Snapchat communications between the teacher and the alleged victim.
Mason also said investigators found no reference to “Number 8” during a keyword search of the device.
Prosecutors have alleged that James used the name “Number 8” for the boy in her phonebook as a means of concealing his identity.
They have suggested the name could have been intended as a reference to the alleged number of men or boys with whom she had slept.
James denies the allegations.
Previous school had warned James over messages
The trial also heard evidence about James’s previous employment at Seaford College, a boarding school in West Sussex where she worked between 2018 and 2019.
The court was told that she received a written warning from the school concerning the exchange of text messages.
James’s employment history has been raised during the current proceedings as jurors consider the circumstances surrounding the allegations.
The teenager at the centre of the case cannot be identified because of legal restrictions.
The trial is continuing.
