using the pupil premium to raise attainment and narrow the gap in the west midlands west midlands...

Download Using the pupil premium to raise attainment and narrow the gap in the West Midlands West Midlands RSC regional conference 18 September 2015 John Dunford

Post on 17-Jan-2016




0 download

Embed Size (px)



Using the pupil premium to raise attainment and narrow the gap in the West MidlandsWest Midlands RSC regional conference18 September 2015

John Dunford1V I P Values


Partnership2The priorities ExcellenceandEquity

Raising achievement and Closing the gap3AttainmentTimePP pupilsOther pupilsPupil premium: the gap in 2014The gap gets wider as pupils get older: 16 ppts gap (67%: 83%) in level 4 at 1127.5 ppts gap (36.5%: 64%) in 5A-CsEM at 16 Big variations between schools and between LAsLevel 4 gap (ppts): Newham 3; Solihull 12; Wolverhampton, Sandwell 13; Staffs 18; Shropshire, Walsall 20; Worcs 22GCSE gap (ppts): Leicester 17; Wolverhampton 19; Birmingham 24; Hereford 25; Dudley, Staffs 30; Stoke 32; Worcs, Warwks 33; Solihull 34

Attainment of PP pupilsLevel 4: Westminster 83%; Solihull, Wolverhampton 71%; Sandwell 70%; ... Staffs, Shropshire 63%; Walsall 61%; Worcs 60%GCSE: Westminster 62%; Birmingham 44%; Hereford 38%; Walsall, Dudley, Staffs 31%; Stoke 30%;

5Missing talent Sutton Trust report, June 2015

Key findings:15% of highly able pupils who score in the top 10% nationally at age 11 fail to achieve in the top 25% at GCSEBoys, and particularly pupil premium eligible boys, are most likely to be in this missing talent groupHighly able pupil premium pupils achieve half a grade less than other highly able pupils, on average, with a very long tail to underachievementHighly able pupil premium pupils are less likely to be taking GCSEs in history, geography, triple sciences or a language

6Looked-after children: some statistics 68% of looked-after children achieved level 4 in reading, compared with 89% of others. The gap at 11 is even larger in writing and mathematics.12% of looked-after children achieved 5+ GCSEs at A*-CEM, compared with 53% of others.33% of care leavers become NEET, compared with 13% of all young people.6% of care leavers go to university, compared with 40% of others.This is less than the percentage of care leavers who go to prison.67% of looked-after children have SEN cf. 18% of the total population. Of those, 29% have a statement cf. 2.8% of all children.62% of children become looked-after as a result of abuse or neglect and they have a much higher incidence of mental health problems. Looked-after children especially need our additional support to achieve their potential and improve their life chances.

7Developing a regional strategy There are some common barriers to learning, but every PP child is different, so .Effective PP policy is different in every school

Strategy cannot be top-down (cf. National Strategies)It has to be a bottom-up enabling strategy It needs to empower schools to raise their ambition for disadvantaged children

So, what do schools need help with?

8Developing a regional strategy Schools need support to:identify barriers to learning;develop an optimum strategy to overcome these barriers;use data effectively;learn what is working well elsewhere;use evidence and adapt to their own context;be brave and innovative;raise the quality of teaching;support specific groups, e.g. bright PP chn, looked-after chn;develop curriculum to raise attainment of disadvantaged chn;monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of PP policies;report impact;train governors.9The challenge of dissemination Near-universal support for PP policyIncreased willingness to use evidenceSome success so far. Need to build on this.

So how can schools best hear the messages about the evidence and about good and outstanding practice?

Through existing bodies? Yes.Through regional capacity? Yes.

10The challenge of dissemination Where is the best practice in the West Midlands?

How can schools best be brought into contact with this?

11Disseminating excellent practice What needs to be disseminated?

What bodies exist in the WM with good dissemination networks?Local authoritiesAcademy chainsTeaching schoolsNational CollegeOther?Can the Education Endowment Foundation become involved?

How would the dissemination strategy be funded?

12Raising ambition Getting schools to raise their ambition of what it is possible to achieve with disadvantaged children

In 17% of schools, FSM attainment is above the national average for ALL pupils

13The methodology at school level14Identifying the barriers to learning for PP pupils through .Learning walksPP student shadowingPP student voiceAchievement and attendance analysisParent viewsSLT, staff and governor views15Deciding on desired outcomes16Desired outcomesSuccess criteriaImproving FSM attainmentReducing gapsImproving attendanceAccelerating progressReducing exclusionsImproving behaviourImproving engagement of familiesDeveloping skills and personal qualitiesExtending opportunitiesGood destination dataChoosing and implementing school strategiesWhat strategies will produce these desired outcomes and help a school to achieve its success criteria?

Use evidence of what works

Train staff in depth on chosen strategies

Develop a regional approach to training?

17Evaluating impactEvaluate impact of strategies

Compare a schools PP performance with like schools (secondary only; primary available later in 2015)18An example audit trail for school websites?

Plus case studies of impact on (anon) individual pupils19How good is the audit trail in each school?Person responsibleCostEvaluationImpactImprove feedback1:1 tuitionAttendance officerPeer tutoringetcThe evidence Seek out excellent practice in other schools Using the Education Endowment Foundation toolkit conclusions from Ofsted surveys areas of PP focus in successful schools Excellent collection, analysis and use of data relating to individual pupils and groupsUnerring focus on the quality of teaching Identification of the main barriers to learning for PP-eligible pupils Frequent monitoring of the progress of every PP-eligible pupil When a pupils progress slows, interventions are put in place rapidly Every effort is made to engage parents and carers in the education and progress of their child

2112 areas of PP focus in successful schools Evidence (especially the EEF Toolkit) is used to decide on which strategies are likely to be most effective in overcoming the barriers to learning Staff (teachers and support staff) are trained in depth on the chosen strategies 100 per cent buy-in from all staff to the importance of the PP agenda is essential, with all staff conveying positive and aspirational messages to PP-eligible pupils Performance management is used to reinforce the importance of PP effectiveness Effectiveness of teaching assistants is evaluated and, if necessary, improved through training and improved deployment Governors are trained on PP22EEF Toolkit23

Using teaching assistants effectivelyHow well are your teaching assistants doing?How do you know how effective they are?

The DISS project: Deployment and Impact of Support Staff

EEF report on Making Best Use of Teaching Assistants (March 2015)

24Evidence from OfstedReports on PP Sept 2012, Feb 2013 and July 2014Successful approaches:Unsuccessful approaches

Unseen children: access and achievement 20 years on

25Evidence from Ofsted: successful approachesPP funding ring-fenced to spend on target groupMaintained high expectations of target groupThoroughly analysed which pupils were under-achieving + whyUsed evidence to allocate funding to big-impact strategiesHigh quality teaching, not interventions to compensate for poor teachingUsed achievement data to check interventions effective and made adjustments where necessaryHighly trained support staffSenior leader with oversight of how PP funding is being spentTeachers know which pupils eligible for PPAble to demonstrate impactInvolve governors

Evidence from Ofsted: less successful approachesLack of clarity about intended impact of PP spendingFunding spent on teaching assistants, with little impactPoor monitoring of impactPoor performance management system for support staffNo clear audit trail of where PP money was spentFocus on level 4 or grade C thresholds, so more able under-achievedPP spending not part of school development planUsed poor comparators for performance, thus lowering expectationsPastoral work not focused on desired outcomes for PP pupilsGovernors not involved in decisions about the PP spending

Using the pupil premium to raise attainment and narrow the gap in the West MidlandsJohn