Menu

Stisted C of E

Home Page

Primary Academy

Pupil Premium

 

Pupil Premium Report 2016

 

Each school receives a Pupil Premium grant based on the number of eligible pupils on roll. This grant is additional funding designed to raise the attainment of disadvantaged pupils.

 

Disadvantaged children include children from low-income families who were eligible for free school meals or had been looked after continuously for more than six months.

 

The total amount of Pupil Premium funding the school received this academic year is £13,530.

 

From April 2012, Pupil Premium was extended to include children who had been eligible for free school meals at any point in the last six years. A premium has also been introduced for children whose parents are currently serving in the Armed Forces.

 

The Government recognises that it is for schools to decide how the Pupil Premium is spent because schools are best placed to assess what additional provision should be made for the individual pupils within their responsibility.

 

We have noted the main barriers to educational achievement of our Pupil Premium children. These are :

 

·         Access to supportive role models

·         Self-esteem and confidence

·         Additional diagnosed Special Education Needs

·         Receptive and expressive language skills

 

 

Apart from the Pupil Premium children with cognitive learning difficulties, we have also noted that the current and historic attainment gap between some our Pupil Premium children and other children is not hugely significant.  

 

With this in mind, we have opted for two forms of provision that are most likely to have the greatest attainment on pupil progress for our disadvantaged groups including Pupil Premium pupils.

 

The first is high quality teaching delivered by the class teacher supported by effective classroom assistants. This particularly suits Pupil Premium children who are working at the required standard or above. The reason for this are outlined below and is based on research from the Sutton Trust.

 

The second is timely and tailored intervention programmes or provision that targets specific areas of learning designed to accelerate learning in order that pupils can catch up and put them back on track to meet national expectations.

 

This type of provision best suits children where there is a noticeable gap between the child’s attainment and the attainment of their peers or pupils nationally.

 

We have specifically invested Pupil Premium into two forms of intervention provision.

 

This is our Montessori Provision and our Speech and Language provision.

 

Both of these provide opportunities for children to accelerate progress in language and communication and mathematics and will help children towards their journey of meeting or exceeding year group expectations.

 

Pupil Premium pupils also have full access to interventions that are delivered by Learning Support Assistants.

 

Pupil Premium also subsidises eligible pupils so that they can regularly attend Breakfast Club. This helps ensure good attendance and punctuality so that the children get a good start to the day and start lessons on time.

 

Whilst this is not a specific intervention programme, there is a strong correlation between attitude, readiness to learn, attendance and performance in the classroom.

 

When planning Pupil Premium provision, context and flexibility is really important as well as securing value for money. Sustainable programmes of provision incur set up costs.

 

This can pose small schools difficulties when planning for small numbers of eligible pupils especially if staff need to be employed to meet a very specific need.

 

Another consideration is the number of eligible pupils who do not require ‘closing the gap’ provision because their attainment is similar to other pupils in the class and nationally.

 

Where closing the gap interventions are not necessary, we believe these pupils will make better progress with Quality First Teaching in the classroom rather than out of classroom provision.

  

This view is supported by evidence.

 

According to a report published by the Sutton Trust in 2011,

 

‘The effects of high-quality teaching are especially significant for pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds: over a school year, these pupils gain 1.5 years’ worth of learning with very effective teachers, compared with 0.5 years with poorly performing teachers. In other words, for poor pupils the difference between a good teacher and a bad teacher is a whole year’s learning’.

 

Improving the impact of teachers on pupil achievement in the UK – interim findings’ September 2011

 

With this in mind, there is a strong case to invest some Pupil Premium funding into enhancing the quality of teaching in the classroom (Quality First Teaching).

 

Whilst this may inadvertently benefit all pupils, we believe disadvantaged pupils will benefit more than investing the same funding into an ’intervention’ programme.

 

Indeed quality first teaching or lack of maybe a factor why a disadvantaged pupils fall behind or further behind in the first place which then requires the need for a ‘catch up’ programme.

 

This is why the school and the teaching staff have been closely examining teaching pedagogy in Shanghai and how the teaching style and high expectations of all pupils helps disadvantaged children keep up with their peers rather than widen the gap. The thinking behind this approach is ‘keep up, not catch up’.

 

Furthermore, Stisted has a lower than average deprivation factor with many children from relatively well off and educated home backgrounds.

 

Again, the Sutton Trust in May 2009 reported in their paper entitled, Attainment gaps between the most deprived and advantaged that disadvantaged pupils derive additional educational benefits from being educated with pupils with higher levels of prior attainment, and lower levels of deprivation.

 

The Sutton Trust refers to as the ‘peer effect’.

 

We believe the ‘peer’ effect’ is a contributory factor is raising attainment and aspiration of our disadvantaged pupils particularly in our context. We do not want to undermine this by unnecessarily withdrawing children from their peers; rather we want their peers have a positive impact alongside highly effective teaching.

 

Further research from the Sutton Trust Improving the impact of teachers on pupil achievement in the UK (2011)  indicates that the most effective high impact low cost strategies for raising achievement can be achieved a relatively little cost by an effective teacher.

 

An element of Pupil Premium is therefore allocated to improving the quality of teaching (Quality First Teaching) through professional development, additional non-contact time and the recruitment and retention of skilled Learning Support Assistants.

 

Whilst it is more difficult to ascertain the impact of a more implicit use of Pupil Premium funding than a ‘catch up’ programme that has clear objectives an intervention can be measured against, this should not be a reason not to invest in Quality First Teaching.

 

The evidence suggests our approach is effective because our Pupil Premium children achieve well in relation to similar pupils nationally and it is our tailored blended approach underpinned by research that is a contributory factor in this.

 

Each child attracting Pupil Premium has been carefully screened using our own screening tool to identify their learning needs. The most appropriate provision is then put in place.

 

This may be academic needs in specific subjects or other needs that impact on their progress such as attendance, access to learning materials, attitude, behaviour, cultural experiences, homework, social and health needs etc.

 

We the track how well these pupils perform relative to national expectations and put plans in place to accelerate progress.

 

The total amount of Pupil Premium funding the school received this year £13,530. A nominal and flexible amount of Pupil Premium Funding is allocated to the following provision :

 

·        Montessori Provision (£6000)

         This will fund 10 hours provision per week.

·        Speech and Language Provision (£1000)

         This will fund 2.5 hours provision per week.

·        Breakfast Club subsidy for eligble pupils (£875)

         This funds 10 sessions per week.

·        Learning Support Assistants including targeted one to one support (£4000)

         This funds 4 hours provision per week.

·        Enhancing Quality First teaching through professional development and training (£1230)

·        One-to-one tuition ( £225 small reserved contingency)

·        Extra curricular activities (£200 small reserved contingency)

 

  

Funding this provision has to remain nominal and flexible because throughout the year a Pupil Premium child may access different amounts of this provision depending on their need. Also the cost of the provision above is significantly above the amount the school receives in the Pupil Premium Grant. The remaining costs come from the delegated schools budget which enables non Pupil Premium children to access the provision on a needs basis.

 

 

How effective is our use of Pupil Premium Funding? 

 

 

It is quite difficult to find out if the way we are using Pupil Premium is making a difference because we would need to know how much progress children would have made without it.

 

We do know from national statistics that the proportion of Pupil Premium children achieving the national expectations at the end of each Key Stage is below the national average. We also know that the rate of progress Pupil Premium make is below the national rate. This means Pupil Premium children do not do was well as non disadvantaged pupils.

 

A good starting point is therefore to use Pupil Premium funding to close this gap and accelerate the rate of progress for all Pupil Premium children.

 

We have relatively small numbers of children who attract Pupil Premium funding and some have special educational needs with diagnosed cognitive learning difficulties.

 

Data on progress and achievement and national comparisons should be viewed in this context and with caution.

 

For example, a cohort with just one eligible pupil could register significantly above or below the national rate. This would be an extremely unreliable way of evaluating the effectiveness of Pupil Premium provision.

 

Instead, we need to consider the achievements of all Pupil Premium children either as a larger data or on an individual basis taking into account any contextual factors or both.

 

We can do this by considering :

 

·         the proportion of children who achieve end of Key Stage expectations including the Year 1 phonics screening check relative to how well Pupil Premium children do nationally.

 

·         the rate of progress our Pupil Premium children make relative to how well Pupil Premium children do nationally.

 

·         the rate of progress Pupil Premium children make taking into account contextual factors such any cognitive learning difficulties.

 

·         Other measures as precursors to achievement against national expectations such as developing positive attitudes towards learning, improved behaviour and motivation, improved attendance and learning characteristics such as perseverence, indendence, self help, practical life skills, attention and focus etc. We use the Autism Education Trust's Progression Framework for example to track progress in aspects of a child's development including social communication, flexibility of thought, sensory processing, emotional understanding and awareness. 

 

 

 

As a starting point, here is a summary of the acheivements of Pupil Premium pupils relative to national expectations :

 

 

End of Key Stage summarised achievement data

 

 

Early Years Foundation Stage

 

In 2014/15, all pupils in the Early Years Foundation Stage attracting Pupil Premium attained a Good Level of Development. This compares favourable to the national rate because 66% of all pupils achieved a Good Level of Development.

 

There were no pupils eligible for Pupil Premium 2015/16 in the Early Years setting.

 

 

Key Stage 1

 

In 2014/15, all children attracting Pupil Premium at Key Stage 1 met or exceeded the required standard in writing compared with 80% of pupils nationally achieving at least Level 2B. The majority of pupils met or exceeded the required standard in Maths and Reading.

 

In 2015/16, one child did not meet the national expected level in reading, writing and maths compared with 78% of Pupil Premium children in reading, 70% in writing and 77% in maths.  Contextual factors such as cognitive learning difficulties need to considered when evaluating data for this cohort.

 

Progress indicates provision was effective taking mitigating circumstances into account.

 

In 2014/15, no Pupil Premium children passed the phonics screening test compared with 66% of Pupil Premium children nationally passing the check. There was only one pupil in our data set.

 

In 2015/16, all Pupil Premium children passed the phonics screening test compared with 70% of Pupil Premium children nationally passing the check. There was only one pupil in our data set.

  

Key Stage 2

 

In 2014/15, all children at Key Stage 2 attracting Pupil Premium made at least the expected rate of 2 levels of progress in reading, writing and maths. Nationally, 88% of Pupil Premium children made expected progress in reading, 92% in writing and 86% in maths.  One child did not meet the national expected level in reading, writing and maths. Contextual factors such as cognitive learning difficulties need to considered when evaluating data for this cohort.

 

There was only one pupil eligible for Pupil Premium 2015/16 at Key Stage 2. This child met the national standard and made above the national rate of progress.

 

​Progress indicates provision was effective taking mitigating circumstances into account.

 

Non-end of Key Stage Pupil Premium Children

 

All other Pupil Premium children between Key Stages are tracked relative to other pupils and age related expectations. The majority of Pupil Premium children are on track to meet end of Key Stage expectations or individual learning outcomes based on their contextual needs.

 

 

Top