Print

Pupil Premium

Article Index

 

Is your child eligible for Pupil Premium Funding? 

It’s important to know that a pupil does not need to have a school dinner, but you should check to see if you are eligible for Free School Meals.

New to 2017-18

If your child is entitled to Pupil Premium Funding and you would like to be part of a PP Parents forum, please contact Miss Pashby in school.

 

 

 

Welcome to the Pupil Premium Section 

Miss Pashby (Deputy Headteacher and Pupil Premium Lead) 

Updated September 2017

I am passionate about my role as lead for Pupil Premium at Hunslet Carr Primary School and I hope you find this section informative.

Over the next few pages, you will develop a rich flavour of what Pupil Premium is, what it means for OUR children and families as well as the vision we share...

Pupil Premium is money that is provided by the Government to support pupils who have received free school meals within the last six years, have parents who are in the armed forces or are children looke after.  The Pupil Premium money is additional to the main school funding and is seen by the Government as a vehicle of addressing the inequalities and disadvantages that can exist for some children, resulting in 'diminishing differences'.

We have the freedom to target our Pupil Premium allocation in ways we see most advantageous to support the raising of attainment and progress of the most vulnerable children, as we are best placed to assess exactly what additional support and provision is needed.

As a school with nearly 60% of children eligible for Pupil Premium, I work closely with our knowledgeable Inclusion team, dedicated staff members (including our PP Champions) and external consultants to maximise our use of the funding. We monitor and evaluate our provision every half term, considering external research from sources such as the Teaching and Learning Toolkit (Education Endowment Foundation) as well as in-school data and feedback. A 'Value for Money' document is created, shared with Governors and provision is applied accordingly.

For more information about the EEF toolkit please click the following link:

https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/toolkit/

For information about the school’s Pupil Premium policy please visit the ‘Parents’ Info’ section of the website where you will find an option to click on ‘Policies’.  The Pupil Premium policy can be found there.

 

 

To ensure our 2017-18 Pupil Premium Strategy reflects the current needs of our children and is as effective as possible, the 'Impact' of the Pupil Premium provision is key. It is therefore rigorously monitored by the PP Lead,  Senior Leadership Team, Class teachers, Children and Governors. This may take the form of a  'Value for Money' Interventions evaluation, Pupil Premium data analysis, pupil interviews, PP Link Governor challenge as well as  Governor meetings.
 
 
Following the careful and targeted use of Pupil Premium funding, the school is proud to share
 
the following outcomes for children in: Early Years
 
Following the careful and targeted use of Pupil Premium funding, the school is proud to share
 
the following outcomes for children in: Phonics
 
Following the careful and targeted use of Pupil Premium funding, the school is proud to share
 
the following outcomes for children in: KS1
 
Following the careful and targeted use of Pupil Premium funding, the school is proud to share
 
the following outcomes for children in: KS2 
 

 


A key part of our Pupil Premium Strategy is to ensure that we raise and maintain levels of Attendance and Punctuality of our Pupil Premium children:

a. in-line with Non PP attendance

b. in-line with our School and National Attendance Target of 96%

 

Why?

 

  • Important for your child's future e.g. Given every opportunity to access personalised learning and resources to achieve,
  • Build on consistent learning from the previous day/week/unit of work,
  • Enhances key social and emotional skills e.g. through friendships and positive relationships with school staff,
  • Develop a sense of responsibility; a key life-skill for the future,
  • Provides the best possible start to your child's educational journey.

 

 

Autumn 1 Half Term Attendance and Punctuality Headlines

 

· PP Attendance Vs. Non-PP children is higher in 5 classes, inc. cohorts Y3 and Y6.

 

· 1/2 of all classes across school are at or above the 96% (National and School) Attendance Target.

 

· Punctuality of PP children in 3 classes is better than Non-PP children. At the same time last year, there were no classes where PP children were more punctual than Non-PP children, showing a positive early indication our new Attendance Officer is having.

 

· In a further 8 classes, the % of lates has reduced from Aut 1 2016, including the current Willow class (-4.32% difference in Aut 1 2016 to -0.63 in Aut 1 2017)

 

 

 

As a result…

 

· Apple Class (Reception), Year 2 and Year 5 have the largest difference in attendance % and will be a focus for further analysis with Faye Pashby, Lisa Lilley (Attendance Officer) and the PP Champions. This will take the form of individual pupil analysis to see if it is Persistent Absentees, holidays effecting this figures and then identify appropriate interventions.

 

· The Walking Bus to start Autumn 2, where the impact on PP punctuality will be monitored.

 

 

 

 


 

To see the Pupil Premium Audit Form please click here

 

 

 

 

We have updated our PP 2017-18 Audit. We will continue to monitor and evaluate our

provision, using this audit form throughout the school year. Our PP Link Governor, James Annetts

will continue to work closely with our School PP lead and staff.


 

Hunslet Carr Pupil Premium Strategy Statement

Summary information

School

Hunslet Carr Primary School

Academic Year

2017-18

Total PP budget

£315,900

Date of most recent PP Review

Sept 17

Total number of pupils

430

Number of pupils eligible for PP

238

Date for next internal review of this strategy

Dec 17

 

Current Attainment and Progress

KEY: PP = Pupil Premium LA = Local Authority   NA = National Average  DA = Disadvantaged

EYFS 2016-17*

Pupils eligible for PP (20)

Local Authority 17/Nat 16

Pupils not eligible for PP (35)

LA 17/NA 16

* Only 7% of this cohort were ARE on-entry in Reading and Writing, 8% in Number.

Proportion of pupils achieving a good level of development (GLD)

45% (48%/52%) In-line with LA PP

51% (69%/70%)

Proportion of pupils achieving at least the expected standard in Reading

60% (55%/62%) Above LA PP

66% (76%/79%)

Proportion of pupils achieving at least the expected standard in Writing

44% (49%/56%)

52% (71%/74%)

Proportion of pupils achieving at least the expected standard in Number

60% (58%/64%) Above LA PP

71% (77%/80%)

Year 1 Phonics 2016-17

Pupils eligible for PP (29)

(National Average 16)

Pupils not eligible for PP (28) (NA 16)

Proportion achieving the expected standard in Year 1 Phonics

76% (69%) Above 2016 Nat DA

89% (83%)

KS1 2016-17

Pupils eligible for PP (36)(NA 16)

Pupils not eligible for PP (22) (NA 16)

Proportion achieving at least expected standard in Reading

75% (62%)  In-line with Nat Other

95% (78%)

Proportion achieving at least expected standard in Writing

72% (70%)  Above Nat Other

100% (70%)

Proportion achieving at least expected standard in Maths

67% (60%) Above Nat PP

95% (77%)

Proportion achieving at least expected standard in R/W/M combined

61% (47%) Sig Above Nat Other

95% (65% FFT)

KS2 2016-17

Pupils eligible for PP (40)(NA 16)

Pupils not eligible for PP (18) (NA 16)

Proportion achieving at least expected standard in Reading

44% (53%)   Ave SS 97.8

47% (71%)  Ave SS 101.9

Proportion achieving at least expected standard in Writing

61% (64%)

65% (79%)

Proportion achieving at least expected standard in GPS

56% (61%)  Ave SS101.8

59% (78%) Ave SS 104.7

Proportion achieving at least expected standard in Maths

54% (57%) Ave SS 100.7

77% (75%) Ave SS 104.2

Proportion achieving expected standard or above in R/W/M

37% (39%) In-line with Nat PP

41% (60%)

Average progress score in Reading

-3.37 (-0.72)

-3.18 (0.33)

Average progress score in Writing (TA)

-2.24 (-0.30)

-2.14 (0.12)

Average progress score in Maths

-1.32 (-0.52)

-1.12 (0.24)

Barriers to future attainment (E.g. Characteristics which pupils eligible for PP are more likely to display)

In-school barriers (issues to be addressed in school)

  1. A.

Communication skills, especially the development of early oral language, tend to be lower for pupils eligible for PP than for other pupils, which slows progress in other years.

  1. B.

Reduced reading comprehension, especially in KS2, due to limited receptive vocabulary and experiences.

  1. C.

Lack of confidence and writing skills due to limited language acquisition and real-life experiences.

  1. D.

Reduced social and emotional development (inc. mental wellbeing) of PP pupils impacts on their readiness to learn.

Reduced resilience in PP children to challenge themselves and be aspirational.

  1. E.

Reduced Reasoning skills due to lower language acquisition, resulting in lower attainment in Maths compared to ‘Other’ children Nationally in KS1 and KS2.

External barriers (issues which also require action outside school)

F.

Attendance and lower punctuality % rates are lower for PP pupils than for other pupils; this affects their attainment and progress.

G.

Parental engagement for some PP pupils is not as strong as for other pupils, (i.e. completion of homework and reading at home) and this affects attainment and progress.

Parental awareness and opportunities to support children in English due to own negative school experiences and possible low aspirations in this area.

Desired outcomes (Links to 20171-8 School Improvement Plan)

 

Success criteria

  1. A.

Improved language acquisition; accessing the curriculum at the pupils level.

(SIP objectives 4.1, 5)

  • Diminish difference between % of PP achieving ARE in Reading Specific Learning Goal, compare to School Non PP and LA PP.

(2017 - 6% Difference School Vs Nat Other)

  • Continue to build on positive trend and diminish difference in Prime Learning Goal of Language and Communication

(2017 Data -13% to Nat Other)

  1. B.

Increase the % of KS2 Pupil Premium pupils in the Middle Prior Attainment band achieving the expected reading standard, to at least in-line with National ‘other’ data.

 

As a result, this increase will enable the cohort to meet the FFT target of 75% meeting the expected standard in reading. (24% GD) and the PP FFT Target of 71%

 

Diminish difference in all cohorts between PP and Non-PP in Reading.

 

(SIP Objectives 2.2, 2.6, 4.2)

  • 100% of KS1 2a children (15) to achieved at least the expected standard in Reading. (2017 Data 71% 10/14 Chn achieved)
  • At least 75% of the 8 PP (2b) Prior-attainers to achieve at least expected standard at KS2, in-line with National data.

(2017 Data 33% 3/9 Chn)

  • At least 50% of the 2 PP (2c) Prior-attainers to achieved expected standard in Reading. (2017 – 20% 1/5 Chn)
  • % of PP children making good or better progress is in-line with Non-PP children. (Early Essence, Chris Quigley Depth of Learning and National Tests to be used to assess progress)
    • As a result of raising standards in KS2 Reading, it will increase the % of PP achieving at least expected+ in KS2 RWM combined.
  1. C.

Increased confidence and positive attitudes to writing across school.

(SIP objectives 2.2, 2.5)

  • % of PP achieving ARE in Writing Specific Learning Goal will at least be in-line with % of Local Authority Non-PP (2017 – 71%)
  • Diminish the in-school difference at Expected standard+ in Writing between PP and Non-PP in all cohorts.
  1. D.

Improved positive learning behaviours and learning stamina through the adoption of the whole-school Growth Mindset Ethos e.g. confidence in talking about learning, participation in lessons, readiness to learn, resilience are noted in formal and informal monitoring.

(SIP objective 2.3)

 

  • Pupils feel safe and happy so that they can access learning at all levels, and know where to find support should they need it. Measured and evaluated by Pupil Interviews. Monitored in AHT formally and informally.
  • Peer and self-feedback in books.
  • Increased attendance of PP children due to attendance at Breakfast club, Walking Bus, mentoring.

 

  1. E.

Increased confidence in reasoning in Maths resulting in an increase in PP children achieving expected Standard at KS1 and KS2.

(SIP objective 2.7)

  • PP children will achieve the expected standard in KS1 Maths so that the cohort is at least in-line with PP Other children.

(2017 – Maths only subject where Nat Other outperformed KS1 School PP)

  • Increase in % of 2b Prior Attainers achieving expected at KS2

(2017=46% to 2018 Target =60%)

  • The increase number of children achieving expected standard in Maths will contribute to reducing in-school difference between PP and Non PP RWM combined at KS1.

(2017 Data: EYFS Nat Other = 80%, KS1 Nat Other = 77% & KS2 Nat Other = 75%)

  1. F.

Increase in attendance and reduced late % for PP children to diminish any in-school difference between the attendance of PP and Non-PP children throughout the school.

(SIP objective 3.1)

 

 

  • Ensure the vast majority of PP cohorts meet the School Target of 96% Attendance.
  • Diminish difference in the vast majority of cohorts between PP and Non-PP % Attendance.
  • Reduce the % difference in lates between PP and Non-PP in each cohort From Sept to July 2018.
  • Reduce the % difference in lates between PP and Non-PP for each cohort, comparing 2016-17 data each half term.

 

  1. G.

Parents engaging with school staff in developing learning partnership between home and school, to include increased home reading, homework completion and attendance at information events.

(SIP objective 3.4)

  • Parents will be able to access in school support to enable them to support their children at home. 
  • PP Reading attainment and progress in EYFS, KS1 and KS2 to be in line with School Non-PP Reading Attainment and progress.
  • School’s weekly homework club is attended by at least 80% PP pupils to support homework activities.
  • Increase number of parents attending events in school to support learning at home e.g. stay and play, stay and read, meet the teacher expectation evenings, Parents evening.

 

 

  1. 1.Planned expenditure
  • Academic year

2017-18

The three headings below enable schools to demonstrate how they are using the Pupil Premium to improve classroom pedagogy, provide targeted support and support whole school strategies

  1. Quality of teaching for all

Desired outcome

  • Chosen action / approach

What is the evidence and rationale for this choice?

How will you ensure it is implemented well?

Staff lead

When will you review implementation?

A Improved language development

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

£21,000

  • Focus on developing oral language skills. Plan in S and L opportunities across the curriculum and in daily lessons.
  • SaLT training with all staff team, including 1 and 2-word level questioning.
  • Employ a SaLT therapist 2 x a week.

 

 

 

Reception on-entry data highlights only 7% are ARE in Reading and Writing.

38% of children in EYFS assessed as SaLT as a barrier to learning.

33% of PP children teacher assessed as SaLT as a barrier to learning (Y1-6) requiring SaLT support.

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

Oral language Interventions (+4)

Early Years Interventions (+5)

Teaching Assistants (+1 month)

 

SaLT assessments/feedback. (JC)

Early Years individual profiles tracking.

EYFS Intervention tracking.

Inclusion meeting minutes.

Observations/ drop-ins by phase leaders and inclusion manager.

Interventions impact report.

J. Wilson

E.Boyce

T.Gray

J.Camplin

Weekly meetings and daily discussions.

Termly Interventions report.

Observations/drop-in feedback when monitoring taken place.

Summer term assessments.

B. Increase standards in reading in KS2

 

 

 

 

 

 

£60,000

  • Staff Training, including SLA through Leeds CC.
  • Maintaining library for library sessions
  • AHT reading focus monitoring sessions.
  • Funding dedicated to improving reading areas in every classroom.
  • Dedicated member of staff in Breakfast club, listening to PP readers.
  • Investment in Ebooks to promote ‘reading for pleasure’
  • Year 6 Easter School to prepare for Reading End-of-Key stage assessments in Year 6.
  • Employing a third teacher in Year 4 during morning lessons, including reading, for focussed, targeted reading sessions.
  • Employ a tutor to run 1:2 sessions for 10 weeks per group to ensure identified PP children are on track for expected standard in reading.
  • Run a 6th Form Reading Mentoring scheme for targeted Year 6 PP children.
  • Run a staff mentoring scheme for focussed Year 5 PP children, which will include check-in sessions on reading.
  • Organise a mobile library session 1 x ½ term to engage parents of KS2 readers.
  • Investment in increasing variety of challenging KS2 texts to support increase level in End-of-Key Stage Assessments
  • PP champions to work with specific children to pre teach vocabulary, increase opportunities to read and build reading strategies.

2016-17 data shows that 44% of our KS2 PP chn achieved the expected standard; this is well below the performance of ‘other’ children nationally (76%) and is also below that of School Non-PP (47%)

 

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

Reading Comprehension strategies (+5 months)

Digital Technology (+4 months)

One to One Tuition (+5 months)

Although the EEF toolkit highlights +3 months progress for reduced class size, this will enable more frequent and robust feedback opportunities in Year 4 (+8 months)

Steve Dawson (LCC) Reading Advisor observations and reports.

Analysis of termly assessments, pupil progress meetings identifying focus children.

X3 Year 6 prediction analysis

Whole-school guided reading analysis, inc. planning and assessment.

Pupil Views on reading pre and post PP interventions. E.g. Mentoring

Co-ordinator to use reading benchmark kit, moderating Teacher Assessments.

SLT Feedback on KS2 phase reading monitoring

Observe Breakfast club, including 1:1 reading.

PP Champion Feedback meetings with PP Lead.

E.Whitfield,

HT, DHT, KS and MW

Termly analysis of clubs.

Termly monitoring, including learning walks.

Moderation termly.

 

C. Increased confidence and positive attitudes to writing across school.

 

 

£26,000

  • Participation in 2nd year of Whole-School Primary Writing Project; adapting practice to be in-line with a ‘Talk for Writing’ approach, including TA’s.
  • Continue to employ a member of staff to lead on the ‘Active Literacy Intervention’
  • Continue to build on the successful Intervention of dedicated Phonics TA.
  • PP Champion to have PP children to work with and focus on supporting High Quality Writing.
  • Employing school staff member to run a PP Handwriting Lunchtime group.

In comparison to Maths and Reading, Writing in EYFS had the lowest % at Expected Standard - 45% PP and 51% Non PP.

KS1: All Non-PP achieved Exp+ standard in writing, compared to 72% PP.

KS2: Although out of the R,W,M, KS2 PP has the highest % of Exp+ in Writing(61%), there is still an in-school gap and gap to National Data with only 65% Non-PP achieving Exp+.

 

 

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

Teaching Assistants (+1 month)

One to One tuition (+5 months)

Phonics (+4 months)

 

PWP project team training, dedicated Staff twilight sessions (with whole staff team)

Dedicated SLT agenda items on reflective practice of PWP.

PWP Challenge day with 2 cluster schools (29/11/17) including observations, pupil interview, staff interviews and book trawls.

Pupil Progress and Target setting meetings.

PP Champion meetings

PWP Team (Leadership Team+ Reading Co-ordinator)

In regular SLT meetings (between every 2-4 weeks)

English End of year Report.

Termly monitoring.

Termly pupil progress meetings.

Monthly PP Champion Meetings with PP lead.

D Improved social and emotional development

 

 

£30,000

  • Staff training and school development of nurture team/provision/resources (inc. environment) organised based on child and staff needs to develop learning behaviours and readiness to learn.
  • Employ staff for daily Breakfast club.
  • Employ staff for a Walking Bus to support ‘Readiness to Learn’
  • Invest in Therapeutic Story Writing training for Nurture Mentors.
  • Invest in supporting Mental Wellbeing Training for Nurture Mentors.
  • Employment of a full time PSA to develop positive learning behaviours between school and home.
  • Introduction of Staff mentor to focussed PP Year 5 children.

65% of PP were assessed by class teachers as ‘social and emotional wellbeing’ being a barrier to learning.

Early Years Toolkit EEF Impact:

Social and emotional interventions (+3 months)

 

  • Interventions focusing on both academic outcomes and parenting skills are more effective than interventions addressing either aspect in isolation.
  • (NFER Research Report into Parental Engagement, 2013)

Through Pupil Progress meetings to monitor effect on child, monitoring of sessions inc. observations,

Nurture assessments focused on behaviours.

J.Wilson

S. McGreavey

At the end of the school year, as part of the SEND report to Govs.

Termly tracking of pupils involved in interventions. Also, evaluation with the Teaching and Learning Committee during termly Govs meetings.

A – E

Quality of Wave 1 High Quality teaching increased so 80% is at least good with 30% outstanding

 

£53,200

  • Accountability of Assistant Head Teacher opportunities to support and develop staff (shared leadership)
  • TA’s daily hours incorporate a morning meeting before school, for a collaborative approach to high quality teaching.
  • TA hours to include a Friday ‘review’ meeting with teachers to reflect on practice and prepare for following week of learning and Teaching.
  • TA line manage and Interventions manager to lead on ‘Maximising TA support in closing the gap for disadvantage’ training through Leeds City Council.
  • Invest in ‘Consistently good Teaching’ Collaborative project with PP Advisor on developing
  • TA line managers to create  a tailored monitoring, evaluation and support schedule, linked to the EEF TA campaign: https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/resources/making-best-use-of-teaching-assistants
  • This may include using the online training that is available on EEF.

 

NFER research found ‘High Quality Teaching for All’ is 1 of the 7 key building blocks for successful support of DA children. (Also see Page 8 of ‘Supporting the attainment of disadvantaged pupils) This will emphasise aspirational expectations for both PP and Non-PP children.

 

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

Teaching Assistants (+1 month)

 

AHTs regularly feeding back to rest of SLT on quality of learning and teaching.

Monitoring and Evaluation cycle, including observations, learning walks, book trawls (see Assistant Headteacher evidence files)

TA line manager and Interventions manager to observe effectiveness of morning meetings and impact on best practice and areas for development.

Morning meeting observations and Friday Review meetings by a SLT.

Gov visits to school/attendance at meetings.

‘CGT’ project meeting

minutes, observation feedback, reports.

F.Pashby

M.Lumb

N.Bishop

AHTs

C.Burgess

Termly or if concerns are raised, immediately after this.

Termly SLT meetings to review.

Action plans reviewed as a working document.

Termly Headteacher report to Governors.

Total budgeted cost

£126,680 (2 terms)

£190,200

  1. Targeted support

Desired outcome

Chosen action / approach

What is the evidence and rationale for this choice?

How will you ensure it is implemented well?

Staff lead

When will you review implementation?

A. Improved language development

 

£11,000

  • From Spring Term, focussed Narrative groups, with the majority of group PP children.
  • SaLT Therapist employed 2 x a week to work with focussed PP children on specific speech and language targets.
  • Reinforcing a ‘vocabulary-rich’ learning environment through dedicated library sessions, a dedicated librarian with a modernised library area.

On Entry to Reception, 7% of the cohort were at ARE in Reading and Writing in 2016/17.

In 2017/18, significantly low starting points in reading and writing is mirrored with 0% at ARE in both.

EYFS profile scores indicate low levels of spoken language proficiency and high number of children higher up the school requiring SaLT support.

All 3 Prime Learning Goals for C&L had the lowest % achieved. (73.1 – 76.6%)

Early Years Toolkit Predicted Impact:

Communication and Language Approaches (+6 months)

EEF Toolkit:

Early Yeas Intervention (+5 months)

Teaching Assistants (+1 month)

Through assessment by the Speech and Language therapist.  Monitored by SENCO.

J.Wilson

T.Gray

J.Camplin

Termly SaLT Impact reviews.

Weekly discussion on feedback/impact in inclusion team.

Summer term assessments.

B. Increase Reading standards of PP in KS2

 

 

£5,500

  • Introduction of Reading Dog in Years 3 and 4.
  • Introduction of mobile library to support parental engagement with Reading.
  • UPS Teacher working 1 AM on focussed reading interventions in Year 6.
  • Employ Year 11 mentors to work for 10 weeks (1 hr a week) with Yr 6 PP children who are at risk of not achieving the expected standards in Reading; being a positive role-model.
  • Level 2 Prior Attainers and GD children tracked throughout KS2 to ensure progress is at least on track.
  • Employ staff mentors to work with focussed Year 5 PP children, who are not on track to meet the expected standard in Reading.
  • Investment in increasing variety of challenging KS2 texts to support increase level in End-of-Key Stage Assessments
  • PP champions to work with specific children to pre teach vocabulary, increase opportunities to read and build reading strategies.
  • Invest in
  • Easter revision club lead by experienced staff to prepare for end-of-key-stage assessments.

 

Only 44% of PP children at KS2 achieved the expected standard in reading – below National DA and in comparison to ‘Other’ Nationally (71%).

 

 

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

Reading Comprehension strategies (+5 months)

One to One Tuition (+5 months)

Pupil Progress meetings.

Year 6 predictions meeting with SLT.

Interventions report of Reading interventions (pre-post assessments) and resulting outcomes.

In-school data using Assessment spreadsheet.

Student co-ordinator (LL)

F.Pashby

M.Lumb

J.Wilson

E.Boyce

Termly reviews.

Year 6 reviewed as appropriate.

Pupil tracking termly.

 

  • Investment in increasing variety of challenging KS2 texts to support increase level in End-of-Key Stage Assessments
  • PP champions to work with specific children to pre teach vocabulary, increase opportunities to read and build reading strategies.

 

 

 

 

D. Improved social and emotional development

 

 

 

£20,000

  • Small group intervention and Nurture support provided by the Nurture team.
  • Employment of 2 x Nurture Mentors.
  • Employment of PSA to provide support and training for parents.

 

 

 

 

65% of PP assessed by class teachers as wellbeing as a barrier to learning.

38% of EYFS PP children teacher assessed by class teachers as wellbeing as a barrier to learning.

Only 72% of children met the prime learning goal, Managing feelings and behaviour.

  • Interventions focusing on both academic outcomes and parenting skills are more effective than interventions addressing either aspect in isolation.
  • (NFER Research Report into Parental Engagement, 2013)

Through the evidence in the Nurture planning, assessment and evaluation. (inc. evidence files)

Tracking in EYFS through individual profiles. Continued high levels of staffing support in EYFS.

Pupil Progress meeting reviews.

 

Monitoring of Nurture interventions in 3 key areas: learning, emotional and conduct behaviours.

 

J.Wilson

S.McGreavey

E. Boyce (Interventions manager)

At the end of each nurture support programme.

Through weekly Inclusion team meetings.

E Develop reasoning skills to raise standards in KS2 Maths

 

 

£18,500

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Introduction of Active Maths
  • Continue to use Mathletics and Times Tables Rockstars programmes to engage learners.
  • Employ a tutor to run 1:2 sessions for 10 weeks per group to ensure identified PP children are on track for expected standard in Maths, with a focus on reasoning.
  • ECaC lead working on basic skills and developing reasoning with focused PP children.
  • New style Maths books to highlight key vocabulary for sessions.
  • Invest in Maths No Problem! Scheme with Year 1 and 3 cohorts, developing a no ceiling to learning approach to Maths.

 

 

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

One to One Tuition (+5 months)

Teaching Assistants (+1 month)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Monitoring and evaluation by Maths Leader, Charlie Sharpe.

 and Assistant Headteachers.

Observations from Interventions/Inclusion manager.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C. Sharpe

Yr6 staff

Assistant HeadteachersSpring

Termly reports

Monitoring in line with assessment schedule.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

G Increased parental engagement/ awareness of value of home support

 

£20,000

  • Targeted parenting support groups to improve quality of home/school liaison and support.
  • Employment of a full-time PSA.
  • Employment of a full-time CP Lead.

Through termly school tracking data of identified pupils not achieving age related expectations.

‘Increased parental engagement can improve academic performance’

(NFER Report into Parental Engagement, 2013)

Termly pupil progress meetings which then feed into weekly Inclusion meetings.

Attendance numbers of parent drop ins/open mornings/workshops

J.Wilson

C.Parish

At the end of the school year through data analysis and pupil progress meeting reviews.

Total budgeted cost

£50,000 (2 terms)

£75,000

  1. Other approaches

Desired outcome

Chosen action / approach

What is the evidence and rationale for this choice?

How will you ensure it is implemented well?

Staff lead

When will you review implementation?

F Increased attendance and punctuality rates for PP pupils

 

£10,000

  • Attendance Officer employed to be responsible for meeting parents, doing home visits and working with cluster staff for PP pupils whose attendance/ punctuality is causing concern.
  • External services employed to support attendance procedures.
  • Employ resources for Walking Bus to collect children so they arrive to school and on time.
  • Fund Staff mentors with selected Year 5 PP children. As part of mentoring, staff to check in with attendance/punctuality and encourage positive learning behaviours.
  • Fund rewards for peer check-in initiative for Year 2 and Year 5 selected PP children where children work in pairs to encourage each other to come to school consistently.

In 2016-17 PP attendance was 93.9% below the school and National attendance Target.

From the Teacher ‘Barriers to Learning’ Assessments, just over half of our PP children have Attendance/punctuality as a barrier. (See separate Barriers to Learning Overviews for a more in-depth identification)

 

Data analysis from 2016-17 shows that in our current Year 2 and Year 5 cohorts, PP attendance was 91.1% (Year 1) and 92.9% (Year 5)

 

Through half-termly monitoring of attendance data, and evaluations of specific interventions (parenting contracts, fast track) for key pupils.

Termly pupil progress meetings which then feeds into Inclusion weekly meetings.

 

L.Lilley

Every term L.Lilley (AO) will produce a report to Govs and will be discussed/challenged at Govs meetings.

At the start of next academic year when we have a full year’s attendance data to evaluate.

D. Improved social and emotional development

 

£30,000

  • Class budgets used to subsidise class trips and experiences so all learners access the same opportunities.
  • Subsidise the Yr 4 trip to Eyam, Yr 6 trip to Kingswood residential, day trip to London; enabling all learners to access these experiences, developing key life skills.

 

During Pupil Interviews, experiences and trips are a key driver in engagement levels in school; hooking learning for pupils.

80% of our children live in households classed as being amongst the 10% most deprived in England. Due to this, some of our children are unaware of some key life experiences.

EVC to monitor standard of trips

Pupil Interviews

Monitoring of quality of T and L as a result of trips/experiences.

HT report to Govs.

SLT

AHTs

EVC

Termly report to Govs.

Termly Pupil Interviews

Monitoring in line with school assessment calendar.

D. Improved social and emotional development

 

G Increased parental engagement/ awareness of value of home support

 

  • Continuation of homework scheme used to engage all learners and develop the whole child through #30things.
  • Dedicated homework club for PP children to access the homework and develop a love for learning outside of the classroom.
  • Employment of PSA to support and provide opportunities for home-school learning.

In Pupil Questionnaires, children identified the learning environment at home was a barrier to completion of homework.

80% of our children live in households classed as amongst the 10% most deprived in England. Due to this, some of our children are unaware of some key life experiences so it has become the focus on home-school learning.

In HT report

Termly monitoring

Observe Homework club.

Stakeholders invited to share ideas regularly.

F.Pashby

 

Termly review, informing the next term’s focus on homework.

A –E

Quality of Wave 1 High Quality teaching increased so 80% is at least good with 30% outstanding

 

 

£23,000

  • Development of ‘Growth Mindset’ whole-school approach by staff implemented, enabling learners to thinking about their learning explicitly.
  • Assistant Headteachers are released ½ a day per week, rigorously monitoring and evaluating learning and Teaching; impacting on CPD needs.
  • CPD co-coordinator role developed to monitor closely CPD offered and impact.
  • PP co-coordinator collaborative work with the local authority, inc local and regional conferences.
  • CPD journals implemented for staff to reflect on practice and record best practice for strategies in diminishing difference.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NFER research found ‘High Quality Teaching for All’ is 1 of the 7 key building blocks for successful support of DA children. (Also see Page 8 of ‘Supporting the attainment of disadvantaged pupils) This will emphasise aspirational expectations for both PP and Non-PP children.

 

Continuous Professional Development is a key driver in supporting staff in leading our drive to diminish difference.

In-school monitoring shows that where teaching has been consistently good and outstanding, all children have made accelerated progress.

Head teacher report to Govs on CPD.

Lesson Study CPD teacher reflections.

Monitoring of teaching and learning by phase leaders.

Termly CPD journal monitoring.

F.Pashby

AHTs

SLT

Termly monitoring in line with school schedule.

Termly Head teacher report to Govs.

                                                                                                                                                                               Total budgeted cost

£33,800 (2 terms)

£50,700

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  1. e.Review of expenditure

Previous Academic Year

2016-17     £302, 000 (approx, based on financial year figures)  £298, 500 allocated

  1. Quality of teaching for all

Desired outcome

Chosen action / approach

Estimated impact: Did you meet the success criteria? Include impact on pupils not eligible for PP, if appropriate.

Lessons learned

(and whether you will continue with this approach)

Cost

Improved language development leading to diminishing difference in all subjects

Improved use of teaching assistants to support Wave 1 QFT, including improved deployment, preparedness and practice (see MITA) (including changes to hours and payment for 5 training  days)

Monitoring of TAs’ work as part of robust PM systems for all staff (see Ofsted Pupil Premium 2013) shows improved performance and learning outcomes in supporting language development and independence across the curriculum in the majority of cases.

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

Teaching Assistants (+1 month)

In-school data suggests better impact than this, based on pupils outcomes from e.g. WAVE 2 interventions.

 

 

This approach will be continued, with high quality 1:1 support and training offered to those members of staff who need it. Continue to find appropriate areas for training e.g. specific intervention training, Blooms questioning, opportunities for Growth Mindset, effective scaffolding for independence.

£35 000

Quality of Wave 1 High Quality teaching increased so 80% is at least good with 30% outstanding

 

Standard of learning and teaching is the best it can be for all pupils through a range of training

All teachers accessed a range of training to encourage all pupils to use, and become increasingly able to describe, metacognitive and self-regulatory strategies in their learning. Formal and informal lesson observations are beginning to produce evidence of pupils developing the desired capacities.

 

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

Meta-cognition and self-regulation

(+8 months)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Continue to identify the most appropriate and effective CPD to ensure that QFT is consistently of the highest possible standard.

£12 500

  1. Targeted support

Desired outcome

Chosen action / approach

Estimated impact: Did you meet the success criteria? Include impact on pupils not eligible for PP, if appropriate.

 

 

Lessons learned

(and whether you will continue with this approach)

Cost

Improved social and emotional development

 

Increased attendance rates for PP pupils

Inclusion team: 0.8 SENCo, FT Child Protection Officer, FT Parent Support Adviser, PT Emotional Care Leader, PT Learning Mentor

 

Attendance, punctuality and behaviour data shows sustained improvement for the majority of targeted pupils, including a smaller proportion of ‘Other’ pupils. Improvements in behaviour have resulted in greater engagement in learning for all pupils during formal and informal lesson observations, enquiry walks etc.

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

Social and Emotional Learning (+4 months) Behaviour Interventions (+4 months)

Parental Involvement (+3 months)

Pastoral work to continue with appropriate refinements prompted by monitoring data.

 

More focussed approach to Pupil Premium Attendance and Punctuality from Sept ’17 through tracking and regular meetings between PP Lead and Attendance Lead.

£105, 000

Improved language development (leading to diminishing difference in all subjects see also F and H in 2016-17 strategy)

WAVE 2 interventions in e.g. SONIT phonics interventions, FFT, ALK

Comprehensive termly data for all interventions for 2016-17 demonstrates impact in the vast majority of cases.

Repeat the interventions next year, with some fine-tuning in the light of experience, and to more closely meet the needs of varying cohorts. Match the interventions to more closely focused barriers to learning, using the School’s ‘Value for Money’ document.

£10,000

(also SEND funding)

Raise standards in Maths

Employ a 1:1 ECC teacher

Intervention made a significant difference to the mathematical development of the 16 participating PP children (see individual evaluation data).

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact

One to One tuition +5 months

Repeat the intervention next year.

£25 000

Increase standards in Reading.

Reading interventions by additional adult support with eg KS1 PP children who are behind ARE - ECaR.

Reading test scores demonstrate impact of interventions for most participating KS1 children (see data on additional evaluation sheets for each intervention by pupil) but less impact noted in KS2.

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

One to One tuition (+5 months)


Reading Comprehension Strategies (+5 months)

Oral Language Interventions  (+4 months)

Using ‘PP Value for Money Document’ adapt reading interventions to maiximise impact.

Enhanced provision in 2017-18 for PP reading and will form part of the whole-school priority of raising standards in KS2 Reading.

FT TA (50% funded)

PT HTLA (60% funded)

FT HLTA

£50 500

 

 

Improved language development leading to diminishing difference in all subjects

EAL numbers continue to increase, with some also being eligible for PP, so FT HLTA employed to support them; Rosetta Stone resources and refurbished room in PDC.

Individual scores of participating children show value of the interventions.

 

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact

Oral Language Interventions (+4 months)

 

Continue the approach and integrate best practice into High Quality Wave 1 Teaching.

  1. Other approaches

Desired outcome

Chosen action / approach

Estimated impact: Did you meet the success criteria? Include impact on pupils not eligible for PP, if appropriate.

Lessons learned

(and whether you will continue with this approach)

Cost

Improved language development (leading to diminishing difference in all subjects see also F and H in 2016-17)

Pay 2 organisations to recruit and train volunteers to hear children read; renovate library.

Reading ages of participating PP (and to a lesser extent Other) pupils show accelerated progress during the course of the intervention. Library renovation completed and more children using and borrowing books, especially those eligible for PP.

 

Continue the additional reading.

Increase profile of reading – add to School Improvement Plan.

Increase clarity on reading expectations in Teaching and Learning.

(Part of £24 500 above)

 

 

To enrich life-experiences for children to stimulate and engage further learning.

Broadening pupils’ horizons by providing experiences, such as theatre and music groups, trips to local places of interest, and ingredients for cooking in the curriculum

Pupil and parent satisfaction and pupil engagement ratings show gains during the academic year, and language acquisition through additional experiences.

  • Interventions focusing on both academic outcomes and parenting skills are more effective than interventions addressing either aspect in isolation.

(NFER Research Report into Parental Engagement, 2013)

Continue with this valuable and inclusive use of the funding, whilst developing additional, more focused and accurate measures of impact, especially in academic-related outcomes (e.g. vocabulary, use of language, logical thinking, cultural appreciation).

£16 000

‘Close the gap*’ between PP and Non-PP Year 2 and Year 6 by tailored interventions.

 

*Diminish Difference

Targeted 1:2  tutor support,  revision and Easter clubs (Y11 former pupils mentoring) for Y2 and Y6 pupils to ensure that the maximum number of PP pupils reached nationally  expected standards

See headline data from statutory tests at the top of the document for broad impact. Individual data for those participating in the various strategies shows which approaches were most and least effective. See Intervention results on separate sheets.

 

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

One to One tuition (+5 months) 

Peer Tutoring (+5 months)

Summer School (+2 months)

 

 

Adjust all interventions based on data gathered, including the ‘PP Value for Money’ document for 2017-18.

£14 000

Improved language development leading to diminishing difference in all subjects

 

Improved social and emotional development

 

Differences already evident at the beginning of EYFS lead to deployment of additional TAs in Nursery, Reception and Year 1.

These additional Teaching Assistants allowed vulnerable children to access areas of provision more effectively in order to close the gap as soon as possible.

See EYFS Data on front page.

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

Early Years Intervention (+5 months)

Teaching Assistants (+1 month)

EEF Early Years Toolkit Predicted Impact:

Communication and language approaches (+ 6 months)

Early numeracy approaches (+ 5 months)

Early literacy approaches  (+ 4 months)

Continue to ensure deployment of staff meets the growing number of needs in early language acquisition to enable children to work through school at a higher starting point.

£33 500

Improved social and emotional development

 

Increased attendance rates for PP pupils

 

Breakfast club (staff and equipment)

As well as the language and social skills targeted, this club made a real contribution to many pupils being physically and emotionally ready for learning (awake and well-fed).

(See EEF positive report on Breakfast Clubs Autumn 2016)

Develop questionnaires and other measures to establish impact of this intervention with greater accuracy. Continue for 2017-18

£5 000

All stakeholders have an awareness of PP practice, including internal and external factors) and the impact.

Training for school leaders on developing PP systems and choosing / evaluating strategies to be used.

Notes and presentations from training attended, as well as strategic plans, are evident.

Governing Body is well informed and beginning to participate more fully in strategic planning for PP spending, including the evaluation stage.

Further training and consultant support to be accessed as required, developing further leadership in Pupil Premium.

Complete an Audit in Sept 2017 with relevant stakeholders for short and long term goals.

£2 000


  1. f.Additional detail

Data used to inform this report:

 


2016-17 Pupil Premium Audit (PDF) please click here

 

Nigel Bishop                This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.                                    

                                                                                                    

Educational Consultant                     07505 425994                                               FullSizeRender 3                                 

PUPIL PREMIUM AUDIT FORM     School or Academy: Hunslet Carr       Date: 2016-17

Area of provision

Developing

Establishing

Refining

Awareness of Pupil Premium and associated issues

School leaders are aware of Pupil Premium funding and how much the school is currently receiving and one member of the Leadership Team has been identified as having responsibility for Pupil Premium. Recent reports on the subject from eg Ofsted have been downloaded and read but have not yet been acted upon. A policy is being written with governors.

School leaders are aware of Pupil Premium funding, know the total amount in each of the previous two years and have successfully responded to recommendations in recent reports on the subject from eg Ofsted. An appropriate person has attended recent relevant training on the subject and is beginning to provide leadership based on what has been learnt. An effective policy has been adopted by the Governing Body, and a link governor is becoming involved in the development of Pupil Premium provision.

School leaders, including relevant governors and appropriate teaching and learning staff, are fully aware of Pupil Premium funding and precisely how it has been, and is currently being, used in the school. Recent reports on the subject from eg Ofsted have been readunderstood and acted upon fully. The policy has been reviewed at least once. School leaders are aware of, and prepared for, proposed future changes to PP funding. A designated member of the leadership team has a precise understanding of how the Pupil Premium is being spent, and a link governor is involved appropriately in Pupil Premium systems.

Notes and evidence:

PP folder (including Action Plan, audit, strategy document, key documents on SLT drive), GB minutes (including Resources Committee). Notes and PowerPoint slides from training (eg NOVAC report).  PPL to complete recommended strategy template and send to consultant for comments. Latest version of policy to be approved by GB January 2017. PPL to meet with Link Governor to update him on Autumn term data and strategic adjustments to provision.

18/01/2017

PP Policy approved at Governors Meeting.

PP Lead met with James Annett (Link Gov) to discuss current PP provision. JA to check Pupil Premium section to ensure website compliant.

SLT and Link Gov worked through Pathways to Success document to inform future PP spending.

Compile all results of P to S document and create an overview of current provision, based on SLT/Gov Views.

26/01/2017

Booked PP Gov and PP Lead onto  Achievement for All: Diminishing the Difference Conference 20th March

02/02/2017

Strategy completed and on website. Strategy includes a breakdown of costings for 2/3rd of financial year.

Policy to be updated on website.

Financial management of Pupil Premium funding

Pupil Premium income is clearly identified in the budget although expenditure has not historically been separately accounted for (disaggregated). However, this is being rectified during the current financial year.

Pupil Premium income is separately identified in the budget but expenditure has only recently begun to be disaggregated. Financial reporting  now includes an estimated breakdown of ‘notional’ Pupil Premium spend by initiative, (and per pupil where appropriate), and the Head Teacher / Principal makes reference to Pupil Premium spending in their Termly Report to Governors, leading to informed questioning by governors.

Pupil Premium funding is identified in the budget and estimated, and where possible actual, spending is clearly disaggregated for specific initiatives targeted at those pupils who receive it. Separate reports of the use of Pupil Premium funding are produced at appropriate intervals for the Governors’ Finance Committee, leading to governor involvement in strategic decisions. Plans are in place to modify provision in the light of predicted changes to the amount of PP funding and the relative value for money of different interventions in terms of their impact on pupils’ achievement.

Notes and evidence:

Finance papers, spreadsheets, Resource Committee minutes, HT’s reports. PPL to discuss RAISE questions with Link Governor and allocate these and consultant’s questions to governors in GB if appropriate. PPL, SENCo and SBM to pilot a spreadsheet with one Y4 class to evaluate the strategic effectiveness of systems / actions and approaches.

Strategies used to raise the achievement of pupils receiving Pupil Premium funding (including evaluation)

Pupil Premium funding is being used principally to sustain a limited range of existing strategies, although new uses are being piloted in the light of recently published external research. The quality of outcomes has yet to be fully evaluated, although RAISEonline data has been noted. Teachers and other practitioners are aware of those pupils who are in receipt of Pupil Premium and beginning to be involved in some decisions about how it will be spent. Governors receive periodic reports on how the Pupil Premium is being used in the school.

A complete review of intervention strategies has recently been completed, resulting in appropriate changes to the provision for all pupils eligible for Pupil Premium, regardless of ability. A range of broadly targeted interventions is in place, and internal evidence of the relative effectiveness of each one is beginning to accumulate, including a detailed evaluation of RAISEonline and tracking data. Teachers and other practitioners are fully aware of those pupils who are in receipt of Pupil Premium and have some say in how it will be spent. Eligible pupils receive feedback on their learning and are beginning to understand how they learn. Governors make a limited contribution to the evaluation and planned use of Pupil Premium funding.

A wide range of forensically targeted and well-delivered interventions based on individual pupils’ learning, emotional and behavioural needs, has been in place for at least three terms. The relative effectiveness of each intervention is routinely evaluated by staff and governors, using detailed evidence from rigorous action research within the school, as well as the findings of national and international studies and reports. Teachers and other practitioners regularly discuss the relative performance of those pupils who are in receipt of Pupil Premium and routinely play a full part in deciding which strategies might be appropriate to individual pupils. Eligible pupils regularly receive effective additional feedback on their performance and are aware of how they can maximise their own learning.

Notes and evidence:

Backs of TAs lanyards, class context sheets. GB minutes. Pupil Progress Meeting minutes. Inclusion team meeting minutes (eg in-class responses). PPL to conduct learning walk with Link Governor throughout the school, including pupil conferences about readiness for learning. PPL to work with PPCs to pilot BLP approach on Resourcefulness with half of their PP children (evaluation in Summer Term).

W/c 26th January

PP Champions led Pupil Interviews to identify a range of opinions on learning with PP children.

Pp Champions to focus on key support and update to PP lead fortnightly.

Pilot of BLP project will be used from Autumn 2017 to ensure effectiveness of quality provision in the new ‘champion’ roles.

18/01/2017

SLT Meeting on ideas for future spending of PP money based on current and perceived future needs. (See SLT minutes)

02/02/2017

Positive Learning walk and observations of PP Interventions (both in class and specific programmes) by PP Lead and PP Consultant (see separate evaluation)

Organise a learning walk with PP Gov during a school day.

Ensure RAISE EYFS data is updated on the PP Strategy Document.

Reporting the existing and planned use of the Pupil Premium to stakeholders

Governors are aware of the extent and nature of Pupil Premium interventions through discussions at meetings although they do not yet have sufficient data to evaluate their effectiveness. The school’s self-evaluation documentation makes broad references to the use of Pupil Premium funding. A brief Pupil Premium strategy statement can be accessed on the school’s website.

Governors are well informed about the extent and nature of Pupil Premium interventions through written reports, and are beginning to use data to form a view on which strategies are having the intended effect. The school’s self-evaluation and improvement documentation makes detailed references to the use of Pupil Premium, including some evaluation of impact, and any additional benefits for ineligible pupils. The school’s website has a readily accessible section on Pupil Premium Strategy which includes a clear report and plan, a general breakdown on how the money has been and is being spent, but limited evidence of impact.

Governors are well informed about the extent and nature of Pupil Premium interventions through written reports and detailed discussions at the relevant committees. Comprehensive data enables them to form a view on which strategies are having the intended effect. The school’s self-evaluation documentation makes comprehensive references to the use of Pupil Premium, including a full evaluation of impact. The school’s website has a section on Pupil Premium Strategy which includes a specific breakdown of estimated past and future expenditure, as well as a detailed and accurate report of the relative effectiveness of interventions used on eligible and ineligible pupils (in a manner which protects the confidentiality of those receiving additional funding).

Notes and evidence:

Minutes of GB, SEF, School Development Plan. PPL to work with the SLT to further refine PP elements of SEF, including evaluation of impact by intervention. PPL and Link Governor to develop further the GB’s strategic involvement in PP provision (including questioning for challenge – see also above)

18/01/2017

PP Lead and PP Gov met and discussed current provision and took part, with the Leadership team in auditing current provision and ideas for future spending. (See SLT minutes)

School Action Planning to reflect further the focussed work on diminishing difference with our PP and Non-PP children. E.G. Attendance, Maths, English

© Nigel Bishop Education Ltd 2016

 


 

 

HUNSLET CARR PUPIL PREMIUM STRATEGY STATEMENT

 

 

 

  1. 1.Summary information

School

Hunslet Carr Primary School

Academic Year

2016-17

Total PP budget

£302,080

Date of most recent PP Review

Feb 17

Total number of pupils

463

Number of pupils eligible for PP

232

Date for next internal review of this strategy

Easter

 

 

 

  1. 2.Current attainment and progress

EYFS 2015-16*

Pupils eligible for PP (26)

(Local Authority 16/Nat 15)

Pupils not eligible for PP (33)

(LA 16/NA 15)

*47% of this cohort are SEND and only 2% were ARE on-entry in Reading and Writing, 44% in Number.

Proportion of pupils achieving a good level of development (GLD)

33% (46/52%)

63% (67/69%)

Proportion of pupils achieving at least the expected standard in Reading

33% (48/62%)

63% (70/79%)

Proportion of pupils achieving at least the expected standard in Writing

33% (48/56%)

63% (70/74%)

Proportion of pupils achieving at least the expected standard in Number

52% (55/64%)

71% (75/80%)

Year 1 Phonics 2015-16

Pupils eligible for PP(34)(National Average 16)

Pupils not eligible for PP (24) (NA 16)

Proportion achieving the expected standard in Year 1 Phonics

94% (70%) Sig above Nat DA

96% (83%)

KS1 2015-16

Pupils eligible for PP(31)(NA 16)

Pupils not eligible for PP (27) (NA 16)

Proportion achieving at least expected standard in reading

65% (62%)

89% (78%)

Proportion achieving at least expected standard in writing

48% (53%)

89% (70%)

Proportion achieving at least expected standard in maths

52% (60%)

85% (77%)

KS2 2015-16

Pupils eligible for PP (33)(NA 16)

Pupils not eligible for PP (19) (NA 16)

Proportion achieving at least expected standard in reading

45% (53%)

53% (71%)

Proportion achieving at least expected standard in writing

79% (64%)

84% (79%)

Proportion achieving at least expected standard in maths

42% (57%)

63% (75%)

Proportion achieving expected standard or above in R/W/M

27% (39%)

 (60%)

Average progress score in reading

-1.00 (-0.72) In-line with Nat DA

-2.01

Average progress score in writing (TA)

3.00 Sig above Nat DA

2.27

Average progress score in maths

0.10 (-0.52) In-line with Nat DA

1.47

 

  1. 3.Barriers to future attainment (ie those characteristics which pupils eligible for PP are more likely to display)

In-school barriers (issues to be addressed in school)

  1. A.

Communication skills, especially the development of early oral language, tend to be lower for pupils eligible for PP than for other pupils, which slows progress in other years.

  1. B.

Reduced reading comprehension, especially in KS2, due to limited receptive vocabulary.

  1. C.

Lack of confidence and writing skills due to limited language acquisition and real-life experiences.

  1. D.

Reduced social and emotional development of PP pupils impacts on their readiness to learn.

  1. E.

Reduced reasoning skills due to lower language acquisition, resulting in lower attainment in maths compared to ‘Other’ children nationally.

External barriers (issues which also require action outside school)

F.

Persistent Absence and lower punctuality rates are lower for PP pupils than for other pupils, this affects their attainment.

G.

Parental engagement for some PP pupils is not as strong as for other pupils, (i.e. completion of homework and reading at home) and this affects attainment.

Parental awareness and opportunities to support children in English due to own negative school experiences in this area.

  1. 4.Desired outcomes (Desired outcomes and how they will be measured)

Success criteria

  1. A.

Improved language acquisition; accessing the curriculum at the pupils level.

Pupils eligible for PP in EYFS will make accelerated progress by the end of the key stage so that the vast majority of PP pupils achieve age related expectations.

  1. B.

Increase the % of KS2 Pupil Premium pupils in the Middle Prior Attainment band achieving the expected reading standard, to at least in-line with National ‘other’ data.

 

As a result, this increase will enable the cohort to meet the FFT target of 58% meeting the expected standard in reading.

At least 50% of PP MA Prior-attainers to achieve expected standard at KS2, in-line with National data.

 

PP Reading tracked across KS2 for progress from KS1 start points.

 

Year 6 (Cohort 2017) MA Readers are tracked through on-going TA and targeted work is planned to meet the needs of individuals/planning adapted to meet any themes through data analysis of predictions.

  1. C.

Increased confidence and knowledge in KS1 writing.

Diminish the in-school difference at expected standard in writing between PP and Non-PP at least in line with National (17%) from 2016 data (41%).

  1. D.

Improved positive learning behaviours e.g. confidence in talking about learning, participation in lessons, readiness to learn, resilience are noted in formal and formal monitoring.

 

Pupils feel safe and happy so that they can access learning at all levels, and know where to find support should they need it. Measured and evaluated by questionnaire responses.

 

  1. E.

Increased confidence in reasoning in Maths resulting in an increase in PP children achieving expected Standard at KS2.

PP children will achieve the expected standard in KS2 Maths so that the cohort is at least in-line with DA children nationally (2016 – 57%)

The increase number of children achieving expected standard in Maths will contribute to meeting the overall Yr 6 FFT Target of 65%.

  1. F.

Increase in attendance and reduced lates for PP children to diminish any difference between attendance of PP and Non-PP children in all cohorts.

 

 

Reduce the number of persistent absentees among PP children to 10% or below. 

(In 2015-16, Under 90% PA for PP was 37%, whole school was 9%)

 

Reduce the difference in lates between PP and Non-PP.

(2015-16 2133 lates: 59% PP, 41% Non-PP)

 

The difference between PP and Non-PP attendance to reduce in Years 4 (Cohort 2019) and Year 6 (Cohort 2017)

 

  1. G.

Parents engaging with school staff in developing learning partnership between home and school, to include increased home reading, homework completion and attendance at information events.

Parents will be able to access in school support to enable them to support their children at home. 

 

PP pupils reading attainment to be in line with non-PP pupils.

School’s weekly homework club is attended by at least 80% PP pupils to support homework activities.

Increase number of parents attending events in school to support learning at home e.g. stay and play, stay and read, meet the teacher expectation evenings, Parents evening.

 

 

 

 

 

 

  1. 5.Planned expenditure
  • Academic year

2016-17

The three headings below enable schools to demonstrate how they are using the Pupil Premium to improve classroom pedagogy, provide targeted support and support whole school strategies

  1. Quality of teaching for all

Desired outcome

  • Chosen action / approach

What is the evidence and rationale for this choice?

How will you ensure it is implemented well?

Staff lead

When will you review implementation?

 

A Improved language development

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

£21,000

  • Focus on developing oral language skills. Plan in S and L opportunities across the curriculum and in daily lessons.
  • SaLT training with all staff team, including 1 and 2-word level questioning.
  • Employ a SaLT therapist 2 x a week.

 

 

 

EYFS on-entry data highlights only 7% are ARE in Reading and Writing.

38% of children in EYFS assessed as SaLT as a barrier to learning.

33% of PP children teacher assessed as SaLT as a barrier to learning (Y1-6) requiring SaLT support.

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

Oral language Interventions

(+4 months)

Early Years Interventions

(+5 months)

Teaching Assistants (+1 month)

 

SaLT assessments/feedback. (JC)

Early Years individual profiles tracking.

EYFS Intervention tracking.

Inclusion meeting minutes.

Observations/ drop-ins by phase leaders and inclusion manager.

Interventions impact report.

J. Wilson

E.Boyce

M.Turner

J.Camplin

Weekly meetings and daily discussions.

Termly Interventions report.

Observations/drop-in feedback when monitoring taken place.

Summer term assessments.

B. Increase standards in reading in KS2

 

 

 

 

 

 

£48,000

  • Staff Training, including Rosa Pryke.
  • Year 4/5 Friday Book Club with librarian.

(10 out of 11 children are PP)

  • Maintaining library for library sessions
  • Phase Leader reading focus monitoring sessions.
  • Funding dedicated to improving reading areas in every classroom.
  • Dedicated member of staff in Breakfast club, listening to PP readers.
  • Investment in Ebooks to promote ‘reading for pleasure’
  • Year 6 Easter School led to prepare for Reading End-of-Key stage assessments in Year 6.
  • Employing a new teacher in Year 6 during morning lessons, including reading, to reduce the class sizes from 30 to
  • 20; creating a 3rd classroom to engage learners.
  • Employ a tutor to run 1:2 sessions for 10 weeks per group to ensure identified PP children are on track for expected standard in reading.

 

2015-2016 data shows that 45% of our PP at KS2 achieved the expected standards; this is well below the performance of ‘other’ children nationally (71%) and is also below that of DA nationally (53%)

 

At KS1, 65% DA children achieved expected standard; below ‘other’ children nationally.

 

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

Reading Comprehension strategies (+5 months)

Digital Technology (+4 months)

One to One Tuition (+5 months)

Although the EEF toolkit highlights +3 months progress for reduced class size, this will enable more frequent and robust feedback opportunities(+8 months)

Analysis of termly assessments, pupil progress meetings identifying focus children, specific wave 2 sessions planned.

Year 6 prediction analysis

Whole-school guided reading analysis, inc. planning and assessment.

Co-ordinator to use reading benchmark kit, moderating Teacher Assessments.

SLT Feedback on phase reading monitoring

Observe Breakfast club, including 1:1 reading.

K. Murphy and D.Bedlow

HT and DHT

Phase leaders.

 

Termly analysis of clubs.

Termly monitoring, including learning walks.

Moderation termly.

 

C. Ensure the gap between PP and Non-PP IN KS1 writing is reduced to be at least in line with National data

 

 

£26,000

  • Whole school involvement in a 2-year Primary Writing Project project; adapting practice to be in-line with a ‘Talk for Writing’ approach, including TA’s.
  • Continue to employ a member of staff to lead on the ‘Active Literacy Intervention’
  • Continue to build on the successful Intervention of dedicated Phonics TA.

The in-school gap at expected standard at KS1 is the largest in all areas in writing between PP and Non-PP (41%)

In 2015-16, 75% of children who participated in the programme, made accelerated progress.

 

 

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

Teaching Assistants (+1 month)

One to One tuition (+5 months)

Phonics (+4 months)

PWP project team training, dedicated Staff twilight sessions (with whole staff team)

Dedicated SLT agenda items on reflective practice of PWP.

PWP Challenge day with 2 cluster schools (16/11/16) including observations, pupil interview, staff interviews and book trawls.

PWP Team (Leadership Team+ Reading Co-ordinator)

In regular SLT meetings (between every 2-4 weeks)

English End of year Report.

Termly monitoring.

D Improved social and emotional development

 

 

£30,000

  • Staff training and school development of nurture team/provision/resources (inc. environment) organised based on child and staff needs to develop learning behaviours and readiness to learn.
  • Employ staff for daily Breakfast club.
  • Employment of a full time PSA to develop positive learning behaviours between school and home.

65% of PP were assessed by class teachers as ‘social and emotional wellbeing’ being a barrier to learning.

Early Years Toolkit EEF Impact:

Social and emotional interventions (+3 months)

 

  • Interventions focusing on both academic outcomes and parenting skills are more effective than interventions addressing either aspect in isolation.
  • (NFER Research Report into Parental Engagement, 2013)

Through Pupil Progress meetings to monitor effect on child, monitoring of sessions inc. observations,

J.Wilson

S. McGreavey

At the end of the school year, as part of the SEND report to Govs.

Termly tracking of pupils involved in interventions. Also, evaluation with the Teaching and Learning Committee during termly Govs meetings.

A –E

Quality of Wave 1 High Quality teaching increased so 80% is at least good with 30% outstanding

 

£53,200

  • Accountability of phase leaders opportunities to support and develop staff (shared leadership)
  • TA’s daily hours incorporate a morning meeting before school, for a collaborative approach to high quality teaching.
  • TA line manage and Interventions manager to lead on ‘Maximising TA support in closing the gap for disadvantage’ training through Leeds City Council.
  • TA line managers to create  a tailored monitoring, evaluation and support schedule, linked to the EEF TA campaign:https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/resources/making-best-use-of-teaching-assistants
  • This may include using the online training that is available on EEF.

NFER research found ‘High Quality Teaching for All’ is 1 of the 7 key building blocks for successful support of DA children. (Also see Page 8 of ‘Supporting the attainment of disadvantaged pupils) This will emphasise aspirational expectations for both PP and Non-PP children.

 

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

Teaching Assistants (+1 month)

 

Phase leaders regularly feeding back to rest of SLT on quality of learning and teaching.

Monitoring and Evaluation cycle, including observations, learning walks, book trawls (see Phase leader evidence files)

TA line manager and Interventions manager to observe effectiveness of morning meetings and impact on best practice and areas for development.

Morning meeting observations by a consultant Head teacher.

Gov visits to school/attendance at meetings.

F.Pashby

M.Lumb

Termly or if concerns are raised, immediately after this.

Termly SLT meetings to review.

Action plans reviewed as a working document.

Termly Headteacher report to Governors.

Total budgeted cost

£118,800 (2 terms)

£178,200

  1. Targeted support

Desired outcome

Chosen action / approach

What is the evidence and rationale for this choice?

How will you ensure it is implemented well?

Staff lead

When will you review implementation?

A Improved language development

 

£11,000

  • Specific speech and language support from therapist 2 x a week or staff following input from the therapist.
  • Specific Narrative groups running:
  • 9 x PP children in Nursery Narrative Interventions. (9/15)
  • 4 x PP Reception children in Narrative Interventions (4/6)
  • 7 x PP children in KS1 Narrative Interventions. (7/12)
  • 8 x PP children in Y3/4 in Narrative interventions. (8/12)
  • Reinforcing a ‘vocabulary-rich’ learning environment through dedicated library sessions, a dedicated librarian with a modernised library area.

On Entry to Nursery, 2% of the cohort were at ARE in reading and writing in 2015/16.

In 2016/17, significantly low starting points in reading and writing is mirrored with only 7% at ARE in both.

EYFS profile scores indicate low levels of spoken language proficiency and high number of children higher up the school requiring SaLT support.

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

Oral language Interventions

(+4 months)

Early Years Interventions

(+5 months)

Teaching Assistants (+1 month)

 

Through assessment by the Speech and Language therapist.  Monitored by SENCO.

J.Wilson

M.Turner

Termly SalT Impact reviews.

Weekly discussion on feedback/impact in inclusion team.

Summer term assessments.

B. Increase reading standards of PP in KS2

 

 

£5,500

  • Introduction of Reading Dog
  • PP Lead 1 x afternoon working with Yr 6 readers.
  • UPS Teacher working 1 AM on focussed reading interventions.
  • Employ Reading Recovery Teacher
  • Employ Year 11 mentors to work for 10 weeks (1 hr a week) with Yr 5 PP children who are at risk of not achieving the expected standards in reading; being a positive role-model.
  • Easter revision club lead by experienced staff to prepare for end-of-key-stage assessments.

 

Only half of PP children at KS2 achieved the expected standard in reading – below national DA and in comparison to ‘Other’ Nationally (71%).

 

 

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

Reading Comprehension strategies (+5 months)

One to One Tuition (+5 months)

Pupil Progress meetings.

Year 6 predictions meeting with SLT.

Interventions report of Reading interventions (pre-post assessments) and resulting outcomes.

In-school data using Assessment spreadsheet.

Student co-ordinator (LL)

F.Pashby

M.Lumb

Termly reviews.

Year 6 reviewed as appropriate.

Pupil tracking termly.

D. Improved social and emotional development

 

 

 

£20,000

  • Small group intervention and nurture support provided by the Nurture team.
  • Employment of 2 x Nurture mentors.
  • Employment of PSA to provide support and training for parents.

 

 

 

 

65% of PP assessed by class teachers as wellbeing as a barrier to learning.

38% of EYFS PP children teacher assessed by class teachers as wellbeing as a barrier to learning.

Only 72% of children met the prime learning goal, Managing feelings and behaviour.

  • Interventions focusing on both academic outcomes and parenting skills are more effective than interventions addressing either aspect in isolation.
  • (NFER Research Report into Parental Engagement, 2013)

 

 

 

Through the evidence in the Nurture planning, assessment and evaluation. (inc. evidence files)

Tracking in EYFS through individual profiles. Continued high levels of staffing support in EYFS.

Pupil Progress meeting reviews.

 

Monitoring of Nurture interventions in 3 key areas: learning, emotional and conduct behaviours.

 

J.Wilson

S.McGreavey

E. Boyce (Interventions manager)

At the end of each nurture support programme.

Through weekly Inclusion team meetings.

E Develop reasoning skills to raise standards in KS2 Maths

 

 

£18,500

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Introduction of Active Maths
  • Introduction of Mathletics
  • PP Lead teaching 1 x a week Yr 6 Intervention on specific maths skills and vocabulary.
  • Employ a tutor to run 1:2 sessions for 10 weeks per group to ensure identified PP children are on track for expected standard in Maths, with a focus on reasoning.
  • ECaC lead working on basic skills and developing reasoning with focused PP children.
  • New style Maths books to highlight key vocabulary for sessions.

 

 

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

One to One Tuition (+5 months)

Teaching Assistants (+1 month)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Monitoring and evaluation by subject and phase leaders.

Observations from Interventions/Inclusion manager.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C.Sharpe

Yr6 staff

Phase leaders

Termly reports

Monitoring in line with assessment schedule.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

G Increased parental engagement/ awareness of value of home support

 

£20,000

  • Targeted parenting support groups to improve quality of home/school liaison and support.
  • Employment of a full-time PSA.
  • Employment of a full-time CP Lead.

Through termly school tracking data of identified pupils not achieving age related expectations.

‘Increased parental engagement can improve academic performance’

(NFER Report into Parental Engagement, 2013)

Termly pupil progress meetings which then feed into weekly Inclusion meetings.

Attendance numbers of parent drop ins/open mornings/workshops

J.Wilson

C.Brain

At the end of the school year through data analysis and pupil progress meeting reviews.

Total budgeted cost

£50,000 (2 terms)

£75,000

 

  1. Other approaches

Desired outcome

Chosen action / approach

What is the evidence and rationale for this choice?

How will you ensure it is implemented well?

Staff lead

When will you review implementation?

F Increased attendance and punctuality rates for PP pupils

 

£10,000

  • Attendance Officer employed to be responsible for meeting parents, doing home visits and working with cluster staff for PP pupils whose attendance/ punctuality is causing concern.
  • External services employed to support attendance procedures.

In 2015-16 PP attendance was 95.1% compared to 95.7% - we aim to diminish this difference.

From the Teacher ‘Barriers to Learning’ Assessments, just over half of our PP children have attendance/punctuality as a barrier. (See separate Barriers to Learning Overviews for a more in-depth identification)

 

Data analysis from 2015-16 shows 4 cohorts have a gap between PP and Non-PP attendance.

Year 1 (-1.5%)   Year 2 (-2.4%)

Year 3 (-2.1%)    Year 6 (-1.4%)

 

Through half-termly monitoring of attendance data, and evaluations of specific interventions (parenting contracts, fast track) for key pupils.

Termly pupil progress meetings which then feeds into Inclusion weekly meetings.

 

C.Mitchell

Every term C. Mitchell (AO) will produce a report to Govs and will be discussed/challenged at Govs meetings.

At the start of next academic year when we have a full year’s attendance data to evaluate.

D. Improved social and emotional development

 

£15,880

  • Class budgets used to subsidise class trips and experiences so all learners access the same opportunities.
  • Subsidise the Yr 4 trip to Eyam, Yr 6 trip to Kingswood residential, day trip to London; enabling all learners to access these experiences, developing key life skills.

 

During Pupil Interviews, experiences and trips are a key driver in engagement levels in school; hooking learning for pupils.

EVC to monitor standard of trips

Pupil Interviews

Monitoring of quality of T and L as a result of trips/experiences.

HT report to Govs.

SLT

Phase leaders

EVC

Termly report to Govs.

Termly Pupil Interviews

Monitoring in line with school assessment calendar.

D. Improved social and emotional development

 

G Increased parental engagement/ awareness of value of home support

 

  • Implementation of a new homework scheme used to engage all learners and develop the whole child through #30things.
  • Dedicated homework club for Year 3/4 PP children to access the homework and develop a love for learning outside of the classroom.

In Pupil Questionnaires, children identified the learning environment at home was a barrier to completion of homework.

 

80% of our children live in households classed as being amongst the 10% most deprived in England. Due to this, some of our children are unaware of some life experiences so it has become the focus on home-school learning.

In HT report

Termly monitoring

Observe Homework club.

Stakeholders invited to share ideas regularly.

F.Pashby

C. Johnson

Termly review, informing the next term’s focus on homework.

A –E

Quality of Wave 1 High Quality teaching increased so 80% is at least good with 30% outstanding

 

 

£23,000

  • Development of ‘learning to learn’ whole-school approach by staff implemented, enabling learners to thinking about their learning explicitly.
  • Phase leaders are released 1 day per week, rigorously monitoring and evaluating teaching and learning and impacting on CPD needs.
  • CPD co-coordinator role developed to monitor closely CPD offered and impact.
  • PP co-coordinator collaborative work with the local authority, inc local and regional conferences.
  • CPD journals implemented for staff to reflect on practice and record best practice for strategies in diminishing difference.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NFER research found ‘High Quality Teaching for All’ is 1 of the 7 key building blocks for successful support of DA children. (Also see Page 8 of ‘Supporting the attainment of disadvantaged pupils) This will emphasise aspirational expectations for both PP and Non-PP children.

 

Continuous Professional Development is a key driver in supporting staff in leading our drive to diminish difference.

In-school monitoring shows that where teaching has been consistently good and outstanding, all children have made accelerated progress.

Head teacher report to Govs on CPD.

Lesson Study CPD teacher reflections.

Monitoring of teaching and learning by phase leaders.

Termly CPD journal monitoring.

F.Pashby

Phase leaders

SLT

Termly monitoring in line with school schedule.

Termly Head teacher report to Govs.

                                                                                                                                                                               Total budgeted cost

£32,587 (2 terms)

£48,880

 

 

 

  1. e.Review of expenditure

Previous Academic Year

2015-16     £302, 000 (approx, based on financial year figures)  £298, 500 allocated

  1. Quality of teaching for all

Desired outcome

Chosen action / approach

Estimated impact: Did you meet the success criteria? Include impact on pupils not eligible for PP, if appropriate.

Lessons learned

(and whether you will continue with this approach)

Cost

Improved language development leading to diminishing difference in all subjects

Improved use of teaching assistants to support Wave 1 QFT, including improved deployment, preparedness and practice (see MITA) (including changes to hours and payment for 5 training  days)

Monitoring of TAs’ work as part of robust PM systems for all staff (see Ofsted Pupil Premium 2013) shows improved performance and learning outcomes in supporting language development and independence across the curriculum in the majority of cases.

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

Teaching Assistants (+1 month)

In-school data suggests better impact than this, based on pupils outcomes from eg WAVE 2 interventions.

 

 

This approach will be continued, with high quality 1:1 support and training offered to those members of staff who need it. Continue to find appropriate areas for training eg specific intervention training, Blooms questioning, effective scaffolding for independence.

£35 000

Quality of Wave 1 High Quality teaching increased so 80% is at least good with 30% outstanding

 

Standard of learning and teaching is the best it can be for all pupils through a range of training

All teachers accessed a range of training to encourage all pupils to use, and become increasingly able to describe, metacognitive and self-regulatory strategies in their learning. Formal and informal lesson observations are beginning to produce evidence of pupils developing the desired capacities.

 

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

Meta-cognition and self-regulation

(+8 months)

 

 

Continue to identify the most appropriate and effective CPD to ensure that QFT is consistently of the highest possible standard.

£12 500

  1. Targeted support

Desired outcome

Chosen action / approach

Estimated impact: Did you meet the success criteria? Include impact on pupils not eligible for PP, if appropriate.

 

 

Lessons learned

(and whether you will continue with this approach)

Cost

Improved social and emotional development

 

Increased attendance rates for PP pupils

Inclusion team: 0.8 SENCo, FT Child Protection Officer, FT Parent Support Adviser, PT Emotional Care Leader, PT Learning Mentor

 

Attendance, punctuality and behaviour data shows sustained improvement for the majority of targeted pupils, including a smaller proportion of ‘Other’ pupils. Improvements in behaviour have resulted in greater engagement in learning for all pupils during formal and informal lesson observations, enquiry walks etc.

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

Social and Emotional Learning (+4 months) Behaviour Interventions (+4 months)

Parental Involvement (+3 months)

Pastoral work to continue with appropriate refinements prompted by monitoring data.

£105, 000

Improved language development (leading to diminishing difference in all subjects see also F and H in 2016-17 strategy)

WAVE 2 interventions in e.g. SONIT phonics interventions, FFT, ALK

Comprehensive termly data for all interventions for 2015-16 demonstrates impact in the vast majority of cases.

Repeat the interventions next year, with some fine-tuning in the light of experience, and to more closely meet the needs of varying cohorts. Match the interventions to more closely focused barriers to learning

£?

(also SEND funding)

Raise standards in Maths

Employ a 1:1 ECC teacher

Intervention made a significant difference to the mathematical development of the 16 participating PP children (see individual evaluation data).

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact

One to One tuition +5 months

Repeat the intervention next year.

£25 000 (1 term?)

Increase standards in Reading.

Reading interventions by additional adult support with eg KS1 PP children who are behind ARE - ECaR.

Reading test scores demonstrate impact of interventions for most participating children (see data on additional evaluation sheets for each intervention by pupil)

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

One to One tuition (+5 months)

Reading Comprehension Strategies (+5 months)

Oral Language Interventions  (+4 months)

Continue provision in 2016-17, with additional support for those children who didn’t make the desired progress (see detailed evaluation documents)

FT TA (50% funded)

PT HTLA (60% funed)

£24 500

Improved language development leading to diminishing difference in all subjects

EAL numbers continue to increase, with some also being eligible for PP, so FT HLTA employed to support them; Rosetta Stone resources and refurbished room in PDC.

Individual scores of participating children show value of the interventions.

 

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact

Oral Language Interventions   (+4 months)

 

Continue the approach and integrate best practice into High Quality Wave 1 Teaching.

£26 000

  1. Other approaches

Desired outcome

Chosen action / approach

Estimated impact: Did you meet the success criteria? Include impact on pupils not eligible for PP, if appropriate.

Lessons learned

(and whether you will continue with this approach)

Cost

Improved language development (leading to diminishing difference in all subjects see also F and H in 2016-17)

Pay 2 organisations to recruit and train volunteers to hear children read; renovate library.

Reading ages of participating PP (and to a lesser extent Other) pupils show accelerated progress during the course of the intervention. Library renovation completed and more children using and borrowing books, especially those eligible for PP.

 

Continue the additional reading.

Increase profile of reading – add to School Improvement Plan.

Increase clarity on reading expectations in Teaching and Learning.

(Part of £24 500 above)

To enrich life-experiences for children to stimulate and engage further learning.

Broadening pupils’ horizons by providing experiences, such as theatre and music groups, trips to local places of interest, and ingredients for cooking in the curriculum

Pupil and parent satisfaction and pupil engagement ratings show gains during the academic year, and language acquisition through additional experiences.

  • Interventions focusing on both academic outcomes and parenting skills are more effective than interventions addressing either aspect in isolation.

(NFER Research Report into Parental Engagement, 2013)

Continue with this valuable and inclusive use of the funding, whilst developing additional, more focused and accurate measures of impact, especially in academic-related outcomes (eg vocabulary, use of language, logical thinking, cultural appreciation).

£16 000

‘Close the gap*’ between PP and Non-PP Year 2 and Year 6 by tailored interventions.

 

*Diminish Difference

Targeted 1:2  tutor support,  revision and Easter clubs (Y11 former pupils mentoring) for Y2 and Y6 pupils to ensure that the maximum number of PP pupils reached nationally  expected standards

See headline data from statutory tests at the top of the document for broad impact. Individual data for those participating in the various strategies shows which approaches were most and least effective. See Intervention results on separate sheets.

 

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

One to One tuition (+5 months) 

Peer Tutoring (+5 months)

Summer School (+2 months)

 

 

Adjust all interventions based on data gathered, but in principle repeat them all in 2016-17.

£14 000

Improved language development leading to diminishing difference in all subjects

 

Improved social and emotional development

 

Differences already evident at the beginning of EYFS lead to deployment of additional TAs in Nursery, Reception and Year 1.

These additional Teaching Assistants allowed vulnerable children to access areas of provision more effectively in order to close the gap as soon as possible.

See EYFS Data on front page.

EEF Toolkit Predicted Impact:

Early Years Intervention (+5 months)

Teaching Assistants (+1 month)

EEF Early Years Toolkit Predicted Impact:

Communication and language approaches (+ 6 months)

Early numeracy approaches (+ 5 months)

Early literacy approaches  (+ 4 months)

Continue to ensure deployment of staff meets the growing number of needs in early language acquisition to enable children to work through school at a higher starting point.

£33 500

Improved social and emotional development

 

Increased attendance rates for PP pupils

 

Breakfast club (staff and equipment)

As well as the language and social skills targeted, this club made a real contribution to many pupils being physically and emotionally ready for learning (awake and well-fed).

(See EEF positive report on Breakfast Clubs Autumn 2016)

Develop questionnaires and other measures to establish impact of this intervention with greater accuracy. Continue for 2016-17

£5 000

All stakeholders have an awareness of PP practice, including internal and external factors) and the impact.

Training for school leaders on developing PP systems and choosing / evaluating strategies to be used.

Notes and presentations from training attended, as well as strategic plans, are evident.

Governing Body is well informed and beginning to participate more fully in strategic planning for PP spending, including the evaluation stage.

Further training and consultant support to be accessed as required, developing further leadership in Pupil Premium.

Complete an Audit with relevant stakeholders for short and long term goals.

£2 000

 

 

 

  1. f.Additional detail

Data used to inform this report:

 


Pupil Premium Champions

 

Here are our Pupil Premium Champions working with children from KS1 and KS2
  
                DSCF5252                                DSCF5248 

 

 

 

Interventions

 


Photo 2          Photo 1          Photo 3

 

         Every Child Counts                       Phonics                                   A.L.K

 

 

 

Reading in Breakfast Club

 

DSCF5317

 

 


Keep checking this page for ideas that we have for our next 2018-2019 strategy. If you would like to discuss any potential ideas, please contact Miss Pashby.

 

 

 

 High expectations, Caring, Positive Attitudes and Successful

letter active schools    letter healthy schools    letteer stephen lawrence    letter leeds inclusion    SG-L1-3-mark-2017-gold - Copy