,
Message sent from:

Pupil Premium

Pupil premium strategy / self- evaluation 2019/20

  1. Summary information

School

The Angmering School

Academic Year

19/20

Total PP budget

240,130

Date of most recent PP Review

2014

Total number of pupils

1194

Number of pupils eligible for PP

250

Date for next internal review of this strategy

Feb 20 

 

  1. Current attainment

 

Pupils eligible for PP (your school)

Pupils not eligible for PP (national average)

Progress 8 score average

-0.60

+0.12

Attainment 8 score average

38.0

50.3

 

 

 

  1. Barriers to future attainment (for pupils eligible for PP)

Academic barriers (issues to be addressed in school, such as poor literacy skills)

  1.  

Literacy deficit, reading, writing

  1.  

Low levels of metacognition

  1.  

Self-regulation and appropriate behaviours for learning

D.

Boys attitudes to learning

E.

Social / environmental conditions 

Additional barriers (including issues which also require action outside school, such as low attendance rates)

F.

 Low attendance / persistent absence

  1. Intended outcomes (specific outcomes and how they will be measured)

Success criteria

  1.  

Improved literacy - reading for comprehension

Improved reading scores for all students in receipt of Lexonic training or small group intervention

  1.  

Students manage their  learning more effectively

Continued reduction of LLD and reduced numbers of on call

  1.  

Reduced exclusions and isolations (periods in the reintegration room)

Fixed term exclusion figure for Pupil Premium  below national figures of  13.65%

  1.  

Improve outcomes - continue to close the PP gap

18/19 P8 -0.62  ; 19/20 P8 -0.4 or less 

E.

Improve overall attendance and reduce rates of persistent absence

 

Pupil premium absence rates below national figure of 7.2%

Pupil premium persistent absence rates below national figure of 21.6%

             

 

  1. Planned expenditure

    Academic year

19/20

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

  1. Quality of teaching for all

Action

 Intended outcome

What is the evidence and rationale for this choice?

How will you ensure it is implemented well?

Staff lead

When will you review implementation?

Teaching plan focus : knowing your students

Teachers  scaffold learning for students so they make more progress

 

 

Outcomes for specific groups of students ( in particular L and M prior attaining disadvantaged students )  are below national averages

Learning walks, Performance Development reviews, calendared work scrutiny, Disadvantaged student data reviews.

AAN

After the first formal Assessment Review for each year group. These will start in November and run through until January.

Teaching plan focus :

challenge

Teachers expectations of all students is high and work stretches students of all abilities

As above. Also, progress outcomes for middle prior attaining students lag behind those with higher prior attainment.

Learning walks, Performance Development reviews, calendared work scrutiny, Disadvantaged student data reviews.

AAN

After the first formal Assessment Review for each year group. These will start in November and run through until January.

Teaching plan focus : questioning

Teachers use questioning strategies which include, challenge and support disadvantaged students

As above. Our self-evaluation shows a strong correlation between effective questioning and student progress.

Learning walks, Performance Development reviews, calendared work scrutiny, Disadvantaged student data reviews.

AAN

After the first formal Assessment Review for each year group. These will start in November and run through until January.

Action research to reduce the gender gap

Close the gap in progress between boys and girls.

Last year girls made almost 0.5 grades per subject more progress than similar boys.

Management of the intervention team by Deputy Headteacher. Impact measured through Assessment Reviews and behaviour data.

AAN

After the first formal Assessment Review for each year group. These will start in November and run through until January.

Action research to improve metacognition of students

To develop skills of students to be able to regulate and control their learning more effectively

Students skills for learning are undeveloped and with training and development could impact significantly on their progress

Action learning framework which will evaluate strategies that impact and inform roll out  in year 2

LKE

February and June 2020

 Budget cost:

Class Charts 

Coaching training

 

 

£4000

£2500

(£6,500)

  1. Targeted support

Action

 Intended outcome

What is the evidence and rationale for this choice?

How will you ensure it is implemented well?

Staff lead

When will you review implementation?

Small group literacy intervention

Students read more effectively and improve reading ages

Students on entry to year 7 with low reading scores

Students in year 8 with reading scores 2 years below their chronological age

SENCO with Intervention teacher assess for progress at key milestones

LGA/JBO

Dec 19

Lexonik roll out

PP students in year 10  and 11 have improved exam outcomes

Achievement of specific groups such as PP, and PP SEN overlap,  middle ability boys - below national average

Lexonic programme has in built assessment framework which will show progress. Review of assessment outcomes in Jan 20 (after first cohort )

JBU/JBO

Dec 19 / Jan 20

Attendance strategy: nudge approaches

Improving attendance in order to positively improve progress outcomes

SSIF and DofE project from 2018-19 - nudge theory re. letters and text communication with home

I will oversee the admin staff who will implement this with regular meetings. We will track on a weekly basis but review every 2 weeks

JNE

SGR

LJY

Every 2 weeks and every half term

Attendance strategy:  individual support plans

Creating clear individual plans for key students written with home, student and school which are more regularly reviewed. This could include the use of EBSA tools.

Consistent approaches towards attendance plans have improved attendance outcomes for individuals in 2018-19. The EBSA tools have been developed by EP service and have proven evidence based practice.

Through half termly conversations with YTLs. HST to review in their LMM with YTLs.

JNE

All YTLs

HST links to Year Groups

Every half term but more often with key individuals

Edukey SEMH education and attendance plans

See above

 

 

 

 

Zones of regulations teaching and tool kit

To improve engagement of learning of specific students with behavioural difficulties by developing their capacity for emotional regulation

Identified students on behaviour stages 3-4 who disrupt learning or “act out” to the detriment of themselves and others

Before and after analysis of behaviour records and reports  of identified individuals in receipt of the tool kit

MWH / SOD

On going

S2L

To provide mentoring  and emotional  support and curriculum modifications  to students on behaviour stages 4 and 5 with the aim of preventing exclusion and re-establishing positive engagement with learning 

 

Identified students on behaviour stages 4 and 5 have well documented clear emotional and behavioural needs which are a block to successful engagement with the curriculum and furthermore put them at risk of exclusion

Ongoing evaluation of progress through monitoring of Class Charts / SIMS, review of pastoral support plans, multi-agency review meetings and academic review reports. Half termly review of exclusion and reintegration statistics.

MWH / TCO

On going

Alternative provisions

To engage students at behaviour stage 5 and AROE - thereby preventing exclusion and providing a progression route to post 16 and avoidance of NEET status

Small numbers of students who are unable to comply with school behaviour policies and expectations and do not respond to intervention packages are at risk of PEX.

Termly review of college reports, attendance at review meetings, weekly checks on attendance. Annual analysis of destination data.

MWH/PJO

On going

Budget costs:

Lexonic teaching

Lexonic programme

Small group literacy intervention

Student support staffing

Alternative provision   

 

£18,000

£11,000

£13,000

£182,000

£5,000

(£229,000)

  1. Other approaches

Action

Intended outcome

What is the evidence and rationale for this choice?

How will you ensure it is implemented well?

Staff lead

When will you review implementation?

Aspiration /careers activity

To create a Moving On plan for all Pupil Premium students in year 10 (23’s)

Below national average sustained destinations for disadvantaged students

Programme devised in advance, qualitative evaluation by students 

PJO / GBO

June 2020

Targeted careers interviews

To advise Y10,11 and 13 PP students to achieve sustained destination  outcomes

See above

Annual analysis of destination data and use  Risk Of NEET Indicator

PJO / GBO

Jan 2020

Curriculum developments

 

 

Cultural and literacy capital of Year 7 PP students is  expanded

National data on cultural and literacy deficits of PP students. Theatre workshop programme intended to develop oracy and give   theatre experience to students.

Planned evaluation of attendance  and behaviour statistics of target group

SSM

Mar 2020

Solihull Parenting course

To develop resilience and skills of parents to support their children's education more effectively

Request for help form parent body. Multi agency reports and interventions which highlight need for parental support.

Qualitative survey / evaluation to inform the development of programme for next cohort

SOD/MWH

 Jan 19

Restorative Justice

Develop skills of empathy of students and capacity to deal with negative emotion and feelings

High proportion of Pupil Premium students on behaviour plans and experiencing FTE and reintegration sessions. 1 day per week of specialist intervention focusing on key individuals and issues.

Review of behaviour plans and data of targeted individuals

MWH LJO

On going

Budget cost

Unifrog

 

£300

             

 

  1. Review of expenditure

Previous Academic Year

18/19

  1. Quality of teaching for all

Action

Intended outcome

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

Rationalisation of teaching learning priorities to: Knowing your students, questioning and challenge. CPD to support this 

Teachers have a clear set of priorities and training to achieve them. Consistency within and between subject teams improves and greater progress made by students 

Challenge was observed to improve in the majority of subject areas and agreed approaches to questioning also observed across the curriculum. Outcomes significantly improved for Pupil Premium students and Non pupil premium students. Negative P8 score for pupil premium students halved and P8 for non Pupil Premium students. 

Clarity of teaching and learning priorities key allowing teachers to target their efforts. 3 key priorities carried forward into academic year 19/20

Inset / cpd time

Pupil Premium First

Teachers plan and execute lessons with Pupil Premium students at the forefront. All teachers: have clear seating plans in which PP and SEN students strategically placed; give targeted feedback so students know how to improve

Seating plans with key student information and targeted feedback observed in the vast majority of lessons by leadership team and Ofsted (May 2019). The outcomes for Pupil Premium students improved by 50%

There remains pockets of feedback which is non-specific and staff are being supported to develop this area of their practice, principally through co planning where moderation and standardisation of marking is now routine. Staff now looking at a wide range of feedback mechanisms such as live feedback which has been shown to increase motivation of students

as above

Class Charts £4000

Mixed ability teaching groups

All subjects group their students on a mixed ability basis in line with evidence base which shows little or no impact on outcomes

All subjects bar mathematics now grouping by mixed ability which has contributed to raising expectations of Pupil Premium students

Mathematics, despite significantly improving the outcomes still has the challenge of raising outcomes of some students who are middle and low prior attainers and pupil premium. Review of grouping in maths planned in 19/20

No cost

  1. Targeted support

Action

Intended outcome

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

Eng. Maths teaching  and intervention

PP students at risk of falling below grade 3 in maths, English and science targeted with support during DEAR time. Additional teachers - support for classes or additional groups

Impact achieved with passes in both E/M at 4 moving from 36% - 47% and at 5 from 4% to 22%

Still potential to achieve greater impact with middle prior attainment students - particularly boys. Gender gap now a focus targeted by Behaviour  Learning and Teaching group

£55,000

General pastoral support

Student Support Officers  providing attendance, behavioural and emotional support

See commentary below.

Potential for further integration of support services and greater impact. Consequently remodelling of pastoral support in terms of team structures and accommodation to create a Support Services hub.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Salary costs

£124, 000

Specialist pastoral support :S2L

To minimise the exclusions of a range of vulnerable student groups including Pupil Premium

16 students across all year groups provided with intensive support and mentoring to be able to re engage with learning or develop strategies for self regulation. Significant reduction of all types of exclusion or isolation in 18/19

Attendance strategy,

To improve the attendance and engagement of all students and achieve whole school target of 96% and bring attendance of pupil premium students in line with other pupil premium students nationally.

Whole school target of 96% not met but movement towards this goal achieved.  But some significant impact in specific year groups such as year which exceeded 96% (historically a year group that falls below the 96% threshold. Some significant wins the specific individuals but equally some PP students difficult to move their attendance because of complexity of home / personal situation

Some success with home visits and commitment to this in 9/20 should resources allow. Rationalisation of attendance team and consistency of process on going with training for new staff. Embedding rewards for good attendance and engagement such as hot chocolate  mornings

Teens and Toddlers

Students on the programme have improved attendance and engagement and achieve level   qualification

Attendance of students on the programme mixed, but all achieved level  in 1 in Personal Development and made positive course choices for Year 10

Programme discontinued due to the high cost model and alternative lower cost developed in school.

£4000

  1. Other approaches

Action

Intended outcome

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

Targeted careers provision

22s (Pupil Premium students in Year 11) all have moving on plan, do not become NEET having a sustained placement post 16

All of target group in sustained placement

Effective model which is being rolled forward to the current year 10 ( 23’s) with enriched package giving students greater range of employment / education experiences 

Proportion of salary cost :

£13,000 ( see support staff above)

 Alternative provision

To minimise exclusions and provide appropriate learning pathways to support transition to post 16

Students in alternative provision placements all completed  courses and have route to progress to education and training at 16

Not possible to entirely remove the need for AP and small number of placements budgeted for 19/20 and 20/21

£5000

Breakfast clubs

To boost attendance and support student performance in examinations

No attendance issues in any public examination. Sustained attendance from target group of students in Year 7 and 8

As well as boosting attendance of individuals in Years 7, 8 and 11, providing breakfast also contributed to positive climate and approach to examinations in Y11. This is something we are replicating in 19/20

£1000

Year team discretionary fund for welfare support

To enable families / students to have the appropriate resources for successful attendance at school e.g. travel costs, uniform, equipment

30% of PP students accessed some form of financial support. Reduced issues relating to uniform, students able to access school trips 

Need is growing and  continued support of this nature required

£7000(Inc. trips and visits)

 

X
Hit enter to search