Pupil Premium Year 7 Catch up
Pupil premium strategy / self- evaluation 2019/2020
|
|||||
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 |
|
||
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 |
|
||
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 |
|
|
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% |
|
|||||
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. |
|||||
|
|||||
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) |
||||
|
|||||
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) |
||||
|
|||||
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 |
||||
|
||||
Previous Academic Year |
2018/2019 |
|||
|
||||
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 |
|
||||
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 |
|
||||
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) |