pupil premium strategy statement 2016/2017 pupil premium1478074712.pdf · pupil premium strategy...
TRANSCRIPT
0
Pupil premium strategy statement
2016/2017
1
Pupil premium strategy statement
1. Summary information School The Sholing Technology College
Academic Year 2016/7 Total PP budget £252,347 Date of most recent PP Review
Total number of pupils 1017 Number of pupils eligible for PP 280 (28%) Date for next internal review of this strategy
Current attainment in percentages
PP 2015 NPP 2015 PP 2016 NPP 2016
EST PP 2017 Level 5+
EST NPP 2017 Level 5+
% achieving 5A* - C incl. EM
22.4 46.8 33.3 67.9 41.9 58.2
% achieving expected progress in English / Maths
42.1/26.5 57.2/65.6 57.1 / 33.3 86.3/57.1 70.5 / 32.8 85.1 / 55.7
Progress 8 score average
-0.49 -0.19 -0.66 0.13 -0.41 0.09
Attainment 8 score average
39.96 47.92 36.4 51.8 42.5 51.8
2. Barriers to future attainment (for pupils eligible for PP) Social economics of PP student families: for example, the IDACI average for current year 11 PP students at TSTC is 0.28, compared to an average of 0.18 for NPP
students
Assessment tracking within school shows positive student progress across all years, but there is a consistency of NPP students progressing quicker than PP students,
thus widening the gap, particularly in core subjects
28% of the whole school are PP students, of these 9% also have SEN needs
2
In-school barriers (issues to be addressed in school, such as poor literacy skills)
A. Students having poor literacy skills:-
Prior attainment: The average English fine level on entry to the school is 4.77, the average for PP students is 4.59 and for NPP 4.85. For each year group
PP students average -0.2 to -0.3 KS2 reading levels behind NPP students, meaning that as a secondary school we are already working with a widening
trend from the outset. Resources are required to reverse, then close this initial basic ability gap prior to enabling progression alongside their NPP peers.
7.6% of PP students have been identified with reading ages significantly below their age, compared to 4.3% of NPP students.
B. Students being equipped and in a state of mind ready to study:-
65 pairs of school shoes bought for PP students this year. 15 uniforms provided.
PP students are on average nearly half an attitude indicator lower than NPP in the 2015-2016 data captures
External barriers (issues which also require action outside school, such as low attendance rates)
C. Access to appropriate environment to enable students to complete homework. o 33% of students who attend Breakfast club are pupil premium o 10% of students who attend homework club are pupil premium o SAM learning average usage this academic year across the school – PP = 3hrs 48 minutes NPP 5hours 10mins. 38% of tasks completed by PP
students were outside of school hours whilst 68% of NPP accessed SAM learning outside of school hours. Average score on the tasks for PP was 67% and NPP 72%.
PP students are on average nearly half a homework indicator lower than NPP in the 2015-2016 data captures
Low attendance rates, being absent from learning. o Whole school average attendance is 94.4. Average attendance of NPP students is 95.6%, with 8.4% having less than 90% attendance. Average
attendance of PP students it is 91.4%, with 24% having less than 90% attendance
Stability of families impacting ability to learn. o A higher proportion of the mobile students are PP (18.6%) than NPP (15.4%).
Low or negative parental engagement
3
3. Outcomes
Desired outcomes and how they will be achieved Success criteria
A. Day to day teaching meets the needs of each learner through quality first teaching therefore closing the gap. Commitment to increasing CPL throughout the year to ensure improved quality of teaching and learning. Induction for new staff is thorough and concentrates on quality first teaching. Increase in learning walks and book scrutiny to ensure that all students have a quality classroom experience. Use of after school revision sessions targeted at PP students and use of one-one mentors
Data captures show PP students making expected progress at a pace in line with NPP, thus closing the gap.
Profile gap for year 10 and year 11 reached as a minimum
B. Improved and effective feedback on learning Book scrutiny takes place every two weeks to monitor feedback in students’ books. Homework is monitored through use of IT based system such as ‘show my homework’. Use of purple pen feedback and www and ebi are evident in every student book.
Students are aware of their current levels and their progress. They know how to improve.
C. Increase in KS3 literacy levels Use of DEAR time every day for 20 minutes Literacy time within tutor programme Regular reading age testing Literacy and spelling bee assemblies Word of the day in all classrooms Use of Accelerated Reader Catch up programme in year 7 for students below required level at KS2
100% of KS3 PP students make expected targets on Accelerated reader All PP students to make expected progress in English written assessment Year 7 2017 PP students with a KS2 standardised reading score of under 100 to be in line with peers by June 2017
D. Increased attendance rates for pupil premium students Dedicated attendance team and home visits to monitor attendance of PP students. Regular parental contact and joint working with attendance and welfare groups as necessary.
Number of persistent absentees (PA) among pupils eligible for PP to 20% or below. The Aim is to improve overall attendance among pupils eligible for PP from 91% to 93% in line with non-pupil premium pupils for the academic year 2016/17.
E. Pupil premium students are motivated to learn and develop life skills Small group interventions take place during tutor time by Science, maths and English specialists. Social groups set up for each year group
Data capture attitude to learning for PP in line with NPP
4
4. Planned expenditure
Academic year 2016-2017
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.
i. 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?
Quality first teaching – day to day teaching meets the needs of pupil premium students Quality effective feedback on learning
Curriculum planning- right staff in the right places CPD T and L, data Focus on quality feedback to students Staff use achievement data effectively to ensure strategies and intervention have maximum impact and adjustments made accordingly
High quality teaching provides consistently high standards by setting expectations, monitoring performance and sharing best practice. (NFER: effective ways to support disadvantages pupils’ achievement) EEF Toolkit ‘Reduced class size +3 months, low impact’ Metacognition – high impact for low cost (EEF toolkit) EEF toolkit suggests high quality feedback is an effective way to improve attainment Teachers use data to identify learning needs. (NFER: effective ways to support disadvantages pupils’ achievement)
Curriculum planning and setting Recruitment and retention: science/core? Weekly dedicated CPL time (Thursday afterschool)– personalised CPD, collaborative work and whole staff training. INSET– focus on T and L, data Teaching and learning monitoring- lesson observation, learning walks, student survey, book scrutiny Assessment data tracking system in place
HEV
KED
KED
SAS
JMA
June 2017 December 2016 December 2016, April 2017 , June 2017 December 2016, April 2017 , June 2017 December 2016, April 2017 , June 2017 December 2016
5
Improved Key Stage 3 literacy
Literacy focus in lessons and tutor time Drop Everything And Read (DEAR time) every day in KS3 lessons CPL- literacy across the curriculum Effective use of Accelerated Reader Tracking of reading ages
To be able to access the secondary curriculum literacy levels need to be at least age related EEF finds significant improvement with Accelerated Reader. “the internet-based programme increased the reading age of pupils by three additional months in just 22 weeks. The effect on low-income pupils was even greater, with their reading age improving by five additional months in the same about of time”
Literacy programme in placed and being monitoring Accelerated reader monitored and tracked
TGA
TGA
January 2017, Aril 2017, June 2017
Total budgeted cost £140,000
6
ii. 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?
Improved KS3 literacy progress for targeted students
Small group intervention and one to one with teachers and TAs Engagement of parents – workshops, letters, parents evening,
EEF Toolkit ‘parental involvement +3 months, moderate impact’ 33% PP and 27% NPP Year 7 2017 students did not achieved expected standard in reading 38% PP and 23% NPP Year 7 2017 students did not achieved expected standard in SPAG 9% PP and 2.8% NPP Year 8 2017 students achieved a level 3 or below in English
Data capture tracking Communication with parents tracked and feedback from parents
DMI/PCC PCC
January 2017
7
Key Stage 4 students achieve target grades or above.
Individual Education Plans for Pupil premium students
Mentor programme
1:1 tuition – core Small group work Study skills - planned into iFuture. Positively Mad day SEN support (9% of PP are SEN)
TSTC student respond well to individual support EEF toolkit – small group work + 4 months impact ( moderate impact) EEF toolkit – 1:1 tuition + 5 months impact ( moderate impact) EEF toolkit ‘teaching assistants +1 month’
Data capture tracking IEPs working documents
PPC PPC
June 2017
Total budgeted cost £30,000
8
iii. 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?
Increased pupil premium attendance rates
Attendance officer and attendance family support officer employed to monitor and respond to absence
90% of students with persistent absence fail to achieve 5 or more A*-C grades A quarter of pupil premium students have lesson than 90% attendance
Same day phone calls home if no communication from parents Visit after 3 days consecutive days off. Home visits conducted on Day1 if child is on a CP plan Home visits conducted on Day 1 if siblings are absent together
CCU Weekly
Pupil premium students are motivated to learn and develop life skills
iFuture. Developed to enhance study skills, life skills and increase aspirations Funding of trips , uniform and equipment Funding of peripatetic music lessons Encourage all pupil premium students to participate in at least one co-curricular activities IAG – future aspirations. Careers years 7-11 + bespoke programmes for KS4 PP
“Students from disadvantaged backgrounds do not get the same life chances to build skill levels as their more fortunate peers” John Dunford, national pupil premium champion Research suggests that arts participation can have impact on English, maths and science learning at both primary and secondary school level. • Greater effects for younger learners in impact on cognitive tests • Wider benefits on attitudes and well-being • Specific benefits are linked with some
Tracking of pupil premium participation in trips an activities.
PCC NEL
January 2017 April 2017 June 2017
9
Increased parental engagement
particular activities, such as spatial awareness and music NFER EEF Toolkit ‘Outdoor adventure learning +3 months, moderate impact’ ‘Sports participation +2 months, moderate impact’ EEF Toolkit ‘parental involvement +3 months, moderate impact’
PCC HOY
Curriculum matches needs of the learners
BTEC Health & Social Care, Travel & Tourism ,level 1 construction and learn to grow on the curriculum ECDL qualification APL places
One size does not fit all. Pathways for GCSEs to ensure appropriate curriculum each students.
Data tracking PPC February 2017
Total budgeted cost £130,000
10
5. Review of expenditure
Previous Academic Year 2015-2016
i. 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
Increase in reading ages in KS3 Introduction of Accelerated Reader Literacy TA employed
Middle impact Year 7 – 91% of PP who had targeted intervention have moved to a functional reading age (NPP 100%) Year 8 – 73% of PP who had targeted intervention have moved to a functional reading age (NPP 83%)
Accelerated Reader programme will continue across KS3
£10,000 £12,398
Enhanced curriculum provision to fit student needs
GCSE catering, GCSE humanities GCSE hospitality ,level 1 construction and learn to grow on the curriculum
Alternative learning placements provided for 2 students Free peripatetic music lessons for pupil premium students IAG School trips subsidised
High impact Success criteria: met Catering, hospitality and humanities and construction PP students on track to outperform NPP Construction 100% PP achieve a pass Catering Hospitality 66% of PP on track to pass ( 0% NPP) Humanities 20%PP on track to pass ( 0% NPP)
Continue with all provision
£21,810 £28,134
11
A third of all students who have music lessons are pupil premium PP students have full access to IEG services across the school in all year groups. Bespoke program for 12 Year 10 PP and 29 Year 11 PP 65.5% of PP students have been on at least one trip this year compared to 80.5% of NPP
£3,015 £12,000 £6,691
12
ii. 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
Increase in achievement of KS4 students
1:1 Maths tuition 1: 1 Science tuition TA intervention Elearning – introduction of SAM learning, Tassimo ( for 22 PP students underachieving in Science) Inclusion support (JKN) Strategies and intervention coordinator (JRI) CPD
Mixed Impact Attainment gap – PP are underperforming non PP Achievement gap – In core subjects HAP PP more students are making expected progress than NPP MAPP LAPP are underperforming compared to NPP
PP students Attainment gap is the issue Continue with one 1:1 tuition for targeted students based on monthly Year 11 core mocks
£1,125 £808 £17,189 £8,517 £16,776 £15,400 £489
13
iii. 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
Students are equipped and ready to learn
Purchase of curriculum resources – food tech ingredients, revision books, dictionaries) Purchase of uniform Fair share – families, students and revision food Breakfast club and after school club
High impact – curriculum resources. Students equipped for learning Success criteria: met – students equipped Low impact: breakfast club due to low attendance of PP students
Continue buying resources Rebrand breakfast club to increase numbers
£10,336 £4,854 £2,500 £7,247
Increase in attendance of Pupil premium students
Family support and engagement officer appointed ( Claire Cull) Attendance officer (Lauren Godwin) in place
Mixed impact- PP attendance sustained from previous year. PP attendance remains lower than NPP Success criteria
£8,000 £12,600
MIS system in place for tracking SIMs installed Staff trained
High impact Success criteria; SIMS in place. All staffed trained and using the data to identify niche groups, needs and progress
£6,000
14
Pupil premium students fully pastorally supported
Safeguarding lead appointed After school support programme with outside agency – No limits ELSA provision Alex Kelly Speech therapy
High No limits – 2 terms 72 1:1 interventions with 36 individuals. 30/36 PP students 98% of respondents said they were happy with the service they received from no limits
Continue £17,000 £4,000 £19,719 £1,200
6. Additional detail