Message sent from:

The Angmering School

Main Pages

More Pages...

Pupil Premium Year 7 Catch up

Pupil premium strategy / self- evaluation 2019/2020

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 2020

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

Barriers to future attainment (for pupils eligible for PP)
Academic barriers (issues to be addressed in school, such as poor literacy skills)
	Literacy deficit, reading, writing
	Low levels of metacognition
	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
Intended outcomes (specific outcomes and how they will be measured)		Success criteria
	Improved literacy - reading for comprehension	Improved reading scores for all students in receipt of Lexonic training or small group intervention
	Students manage their learning more effectively	Continued reduction of LLD and reduced numbers of on call
	Reduced exclusions and isolations (periods in the reintegration room)	Fixed term exclusion figure for Pupil Premium below national figures of 13.65%
	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%

Planned expenditure
Academic year		2019/2020
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.
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?	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.	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.	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.	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.	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	February and June 2020
Budget cost: Class Charts Coaching training					£4000 £2500 (£6,500)
Targeted support
Action	Intended outcome		What is the evidence and rationale for this choice?	How will you ensure it is implemented well?	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	Dec 2019
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 )	Dec 2019 / Jan 2020
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	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.	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	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.	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.	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)
Other approaches
Action	Intended outcome		What is the evidence and rationale for this choice?	How will you ensure it is implemented well?	When will you review implementation?
Aspiration /careers activity	To create a Moving On plan for all Pupil Premium students in year 10 (23s)		Below national average sustained destinations for disadvantaged students	Programme devised in advance, qualitative evaluation by students	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	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	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	Jan 2019
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	On going
Budget cost Unifrog					£300

Review of expenditure
Previous Academic Year		2018/2019
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 students who are middle and low prior attainers and pupil premium. Review of grouping in maths planned in 19/20	No cost
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
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 ( 23s) 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 2019/2020	£1000
Year team discretionary fund for welfare support	To enable families / students to have the appropriate resources for successful attendance at school eg 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 vists)

The Angmering School | Hosted by New Era Education | DB Primary | DB Learning Library | Log in