IT teacher is struck off after being caught red-handed altering his pupils' coursework during the middle of exam

By WILL HALLOWELL, NEWS REPORTER Published: 00:01, 13 August 2026 | Updated: 00:09, 13 August 2026 An IT teacher has been struck off after he was caught red-handed editing his pupils' coursework during the middle of an exam.  Sai Krishnan Santhosh Kumar, 36, tried to covertly alter or create coursework for 23 students at Meadow Park School in Whitley, Coventry, without their knowledge in or around December 2024.  But the teacher was rumbled when a colleague noticed his initials within a pupil's PowerPoint presentation.  Mr Kumar was trying to make improvements to the presentation slides in the middle of the school assessment.  The 36-year-old was suspended on January 13 last year and resigned a week later on January 20 after a school investigation found that he had edited nearly a whole class worth of coursework.  A colleague was 'able to identify 23 pupil folders which contained work that Mr Kumar had amended', according to a tribunal.  His students' hard work on one of three BTEC IT modules was subsequently 'disregarded' to 'aggregate the pupils' grades from the two unaffected components'. Mr Kumar has now been banned from teaching after the tribunal ruled that he had abused his position and trust of his pupils, and violated their rights.  Sai Krishnan Santhosh Kumar, 36, has been banned from the profession after he was caught editing his pupils' coursework presentations He worked as an IT teacher at Meadow Park School in Whitley, Coventry, (pictured) before he resigned after an internal investigation Mr Kumar, who had 13 years' experience as a teacher, was accused of editing or adding material to presentations by 19 pupils for one IT module and nine for another. He admitted these allegations but denied his conduct was dishonest and lacking integrity. The tribunal found him guilty on all counts.  It was required that an assessment record, including a declaration, was produced for every pupil which was signed by both pupil and teacher to confirm that the work was the student's own.  However the Teaching Regulation Agency panel noted: 'At the material time his genuine belief was that he was providing permissible support to pupils'.  This was despite his 'attempts at providing "support"' by 'completing the entirety' of one student's presentation.  During the tribunal, Witness B, believed to be a school colleague, 'explained that his suspicions were aroused regarding the authenticity of Pupil E's PowerPoint presentation' as 'she did not recognise the presentation when it was loaded on the computer' as the edits were done 'without her knowledge'.  This led the witness to 'scrutinise the presentation more closely and observe that Mr Kumar appeared to be accessing and editing it in real time'. The tribunal was also presented with screenshots which showed the version history of pupils' files, which revealed that 'at times a user by the name Sai Krishnan had accessed the documents and made changes'. Mr Kumar, who now works as a customer expert in Glasgow at an AI technology company, was found to have 'produced, edited and added to the coursework of several pupils without their knowledge and consent'.  The panel, describing the teacher's actions as 'dishonest', said: 'Mr Kumar allowed this work to be presented as their own and if his actions had not been detected by Witness B, Pearson (the exam board) would have been led to believe that the pupils credited for the coursework were responsible for producing it.  'The panel considered Mr Kumar's contention that he had not taken steps to conceal his conduct and that he had not undertaken this conduct for personal gain.  'However, the panel determined that Mr Kumar's motivation was not relevant to the panel's determination as to whether Mr Kumar's conduct was dishonest.' The panel added: 'It is likely that Mr Kumar's conduct was undertaken in order to improve the performance of pupils in the relevant cohort.'  It was ruled his actions 'amounted to misconduct of a serious nature which fell significantly short of the standards expected of the profession' and he was subsequently banned from teaching indefinitely.   He cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children's home in England.  However he has the right to appeal this decision. He would also be able to apply for the ban to be lifted in July 2029. Mr Kumar was approached for comment.