Total number of pupils in the school / 438
Number of PP-eligible pupils: / 78 (2014 -2015) 66 (2015-2016)
Amount per pupil: / 1,300 Pupil 2x LAC (1900) (2014 – 2015)
1320 Pupil Premium 3x LAC (1900) (2015-2016)
Total pupil premium budget: / Financial Year / PP allocated funding / LAC allocated funding
Amount / Amount / No. of chn
15-16 / 87120 / 5700 / 3
14-15 / 98,800 / 3800 / 2
13-14 / 68,616 / 1050 / 2
12-13 / 38,625 / 998 / 1
11-12 / 22,935 / 0 / 0
Evidence of school performance
Key statements from Ofsted report(s) relating to the performance of disadvantaged pupils: / The school ensures that those pupils known to be eligible for the pupil premium make good progress.
Ofsted September 2012
Summary of school’s performance data:
Does the school’s performance data indicate that attainment and progress for disadvantaged pupils are improving, and that gaps are closing, both within the school and compared to the national average? / 2014 Raise & Current School data (July 2015 Unvalidated)
Overview of Performance
Phonics Screening -
2015 data suggests:
Year 1: 85% Non-pp achieved the pass mark or above. 77% pp with one child at 31 marks which would take the result to 84.62% (10/13 achieved)
Year 2: 100% of all pp children achieved the pass mark in Year 2 phonics re-screening.
KS1 average points in reading
2014 RAISE - The school gap between pupil premium and non-pupil premium continues to close and stands at -0.9. The overall average is 0.7 points greater than the national for this group. The gap between the % of pupil premium and non-pupil premium achieving level 2b+ children has decreased by 13% in two years The school gap has closed by 1.2 points in 2 years.
2015 Un –validated data suggests that the average points score for non-pupil premium 17.37 and pupil premium i16.88 – this leaves a gap of 0.49. The school overall points score in reading has increased from 16.4 from 17.27 including PP and non-pp – this demonstrates an improving three year trend for the performance of both groups and a continuing narrowing gap.
KS1 average points scores in writing
2014 RAISE - following a significant reduction in the within school gap from -2.0 to -0.9 the gap widened last year to -1.9. Case studies demonstrate the provision for identified children. The gap between the % of pupil premium and non-pupil premium children achieving level 2b+ has decreased by 26% in two years
2015 suggests that a significant gain has been made in the overall attainment of pupils – 14.7 (2014) to 16.12 (2015) The average points score of pp pupils was 15.75 against their non-pp counterparts at 16.22. Last year the gap was -1.9 between these two groups. Unvalidated data suggests that this now stands at -0.47 reducing by 1,43 points whilst demonstrating a significant improvement in attainment for both groups.
KS1 average points scores in mathematics.
2014 RAISE - The pupil premium average points score is 0.6 less than the non-pupil premium average but 0.7 greater than the national pupil premium average. The school gap has closed by 1.3 points in two years.
2015 data suggests: that attainment in mathematics for ‘all’ has continued to improve and stands at 16.63 compared to 2014 at 16.1. Attainment for non –pp 16.97 in comparison to 15.38 pp – representing a gap of 1.59. The gap between all non-pp and pp has increased by 1 point, however the overall attainment of this group is significantly better than 2014.
Year 3 - 2015 end of year - Non-pp students making good progress and pp students making better than their non- pp counterparts in writing– Writing pp 5 points progress from starting points against 3.79 non-pp (Closing gaps previously identified on RAISE at -1.9 between all and non pp.) Current gap 0.71. Progress is good in reading and mathematics (in excess of 3 point maths, and 4 points reading the gap between all and peers stands at just below one point.)
Year 4 - Progress of an identified group of PP children is slightly below NPP children (although still demonstrating at least good and in many cases outstanding from their starting points) however the overall percentage of children working at or above age related expectation has significantly increased (see table below).
Pupil Premium
End of KS1 / End of year 4
% of children working at or above expected / % of children working above expected / % of children working at or above expected / % of children working above expected
Reading / 61.54% (8) / 30.77% (4) / 92.3% (12) / 53.85% (7)
Writing / 53.85% (7) / 23.08% (3) / 92.3% (12 / 46.15% (6)
Maths / 76.92% (10) / 46.15% (6) / 92.3% (12) / 53.85% (7)
*Total children =13
School’s pupil premium statement: / Does the school’s published pupil premium statement clearly describe how the school is planning to allocate funding to raise attainment and progress for disadvantaged pupils, and close gaps?
The school currently publishes a statement of expenditure on its website and an overview of impact as well as actioning planning against key priorities.(contained within this document)
Priorities are clearly identified from the school’s data and all staff track pp against their non-pp counterparts. As the school develops no levels provision, an understanding of how this works will be shared with parents and further explanation of how sub-groups are tracked will be detailed on the website.
The school’s pp policy is displayed on the website.
Individual reporting logs are in place for pp pupils and staff are able to clearly articulate achievement against non-pp pupils, next steps and specific personalised provision.
Impact statements to support expenditure are currently being reviewed and the Head of Centre has worked with Phase Leaders to share and discuss the work of the Sutton Trust (EEF) and the role it has to play in supporting decisions made on the allocation of funding.
Systems/procedures / All pupil premium children have an individual plan – the plan details current data and targets. Next steps for learning are detailed on the plan although the school recognises that further development of milestones information and an impact analysis against next steps would also be useful. Individual needs which contribute to data but may well not be reflected in data are also detailed – e.g lacks confidence, , plays a violin outside of school etc – such information contributes to provision for the whole child which is tracked by class teachers and monitored by Phase Leaders
Targets for all children are set by Phase Leaders in discussion with the Head of Centre. Performance data is reviewed termly and closely triangulated with progress in books and the quality of teaching. Detailed discussion regarding class data take place as part of teaching over time monitoring. Where development areas are identified these are readily incorporated in to action plans and targeted the following term (and beyond if required)
2015 -2016 – The school has recently appointed a Lead Practitioner who has taken on the role of PP champion.
Self-evaluation Template & Action Plan – Key Priorities 2014 – 2015(please note that the following action plan is representative of key priorities and not ‘all’ priorities)
The table below summarises the identified areas of focus, barriers to learning, chosen strategies, success criteria and funding needed to improve outcomes for the school’s disadvantaged pupils.
Focus / Barriers to learning / Desired outcomes / Success Criteria / Chosen Strategies / Research & Evaluation of Impact / Completed/monitoring / Cost inc cost per pupilIdentified from Raise 2013-2014 –KS1 attainment gap in writing widened by 1pt having previously demonstrated a narrowing gap / 17 children identified at the start of the academic year as requiring significant additional support – all made good/outstanding progress from their starting points to secure level 1a, but not yet demonstrating enough evidence to be level 2. (July 2014) / Improved attainment in writing – securing level 2b before the end of Year 3 to close the gap with their peers. / Gaps in writing between non -pp chn and pp chn at level 1a at the end of Year 2 continue to close with identified chn attaining level 2b at the end of Year 3. / Sets
Small group intervention
Stepping stones and bridges for writing / EEF research suggests that one to one tuition where the pupil is removed from their class and given intensive tuition can positively impact (+ 5 months) – research suggests that regular sessions of about 30 minutes, 3-5 times a week over a period of 6-12 weeks appear to have optimum impact. / Nicola Sales / 1,412 TA time
Impact on outcomes & next steps to be accounted for in 2015/16 action planning:
Non-pp pupils making good progress and pp students making better than their non- pp counterparts in writing– Writing progress for pp pupils = 5 points progress from starting points against 3.79 non-pp for the same period of time (Closing gaps previously identified on RAISE at -1.9 between all and non pp.) Current gap 0.71.
Focus / Barriers to learning / Desired outcomes / Success Criteria / Chosen Strategies / Research & Evaluation of Impact / Completed/monitoring / Cost inc cost per pupil
Identified from 2013-14 RAISE – Further increase the % of pp students who attain the phonics screening pass mark so that all pupils attain above the national average for all, rather than their comparative group – given variations in a small cohort size. / Low baseline of phonics knowledge reflected in EY’s scores / Improved knowledge and achievement of the phonics screening pass mark / Gaps in screening further close so that pp students attain in line with their non- pp counterparts – data predications:
Non pp - 84% achieve the pass mark
PP 83% achieve the pass mark / Precision teaching
Small group intervention
Whole school approach to the delivery of phonics
Clear links to appraisal targets / EEF research suggests that one to one tuition where the pupil is removed from their class and given intensive tuition can positively impact (+ 5 months) – research suggests that regular sessions of about 30 minutes, 3-5 times a week over a period of 6-12 weeks appear to have optimum impact. In order to make the sessions more age appropriate and aligned to teaching need we have shortened the sessions to 15 minutes.
Sessions are delivered by a teaching assistant trained in the delivery of precision teaching and monitored by the SENCO and Phase Leader. Before the school commits to this strategy as a future option – a review of impact and the reason(s) contributing to such a need will be evaluated.
Robust evidence from EEF suggests that setting for low attaining can, at times, negatively impact therefore we have targeted sets at the top of this group as the research suggests – this, then in turn, reduces class sizes which research suggests can improve standards by +3 months. / Debbie Osgun / 1,412 x2 ta time
(2,824)
1,412 TA time to support setting structure
Impact on outcomes & next steps to be accounted for in 2015/16 action planning:
Phonics Screening –
2015 un-validated data:
Year 1: 85% Non-pp, 77% pp with one child at 31 marks which would take the result to 84.62% (10/13 achieved)
Year 2: 100% of all pp children achieved the pass mark in Year 2 phonics re-screening.
From the 8 children identified in January for additional support – 7 achieved the pass mark, having started at the 10-19 marks banding on their baseline test. 1 child was 1 mark off achieving the pass mark. All benefited form 12 weeks of 1 to 1 precision teaching for ten minutes 3x times per week.
Focus / Barriers to learning / Desired outcomes / Success Criteria / Chosen Strategies / Research & Evaluation of Impact / Completed/monitoring / Cost inc cost per pupil
Identified from Year 4 data trawl – Autumn – Improve reading & writing levels for identified disadvantaged pupils in Year 4 so that outstanding progress is made to reach attainment which is at least comparable to their non –disadvantaged peers
(6x chn) / Disengagement, inability to relate to texts
Mainly Sentence structure and punctuation specific targets to move through a level / Improved engagement and attainment / Gap in expected level in reading, between disadvantaged pupils and others reduced by 1 percentage points
Gap in expected level in writing, between disadvantaged pupils and others reduced by 1 percentage points / Reading comprehension and peer tutoring
One to one feedback and response time with class teacher / EEF Toolkit demonstrates that feedback (+ 8 months) and one to one tuition (+5 months) can positively impact on overall performance – therefore the school has chosen, specific, targeted feedback time for individuals with direct one to one tuition as an approach to raising attainment. This programme will be in place for one term and targets pp students identified from the April data trawl. Evidence from the EEF toolkit shows that both these strategies are effective relative to their costs, and when combined result in even greater impact – particularly for primary children. / Nicola Sales / 2,250
X6 children
Impact on outcomes & next steps to be accounted for in 2015/16 action planning:
The 6 children who were targeted for the intervention within the class made 4.3 points progress in writing and 3.4 points progress in reading. This exceeded the
progress of non-disadvantaged children within the same group by and 0.3 and 0.1respectively. Two children made outstanding progress of 6 points in writing. The
attainment of all the pupil’s was brought in line with national expectations and was exceeded for 3 pupil’s in reading and 2 pupil’s in writing.
Focus / Barriers to learning / Desired outcomes / Success Criteria / Chosen Strategies / Research & Evaluation of Impact / Completed/monitoring / Cost inc cost per pupil
Identified from Year 1 teaching over time(April 2015) – 6 x children making less than expected progress in writing / 1x extended period of time absent
1x part-timetable
4x at risk of not making expected progress (level wa/1c) starting points Year 1 / Clear understanding and mapped out profile of the barriers to learning for each child / Progress accelerated from starting points so that pupils make at least expected progress in writing – achieving 1b+ / Precision teaching
Behaviour support worker
Parenting courses
Help in the home to establish positive routines
One to one feedback and response time with the class teacher
staff training where required on targeted differentiation
small group – parental involvement / Children identified to take part in stepping stones, an eight week programme where parents attend sessions with their child within school time – EEF suggests that parental support can increase attainment by +3 months – although the evidence to to support this judgement is less conclusive. Careful monitoring and evaluation of this strategy required from the school’s point of view. / Louise hall / Differentiation course 125 plus 148 supply
Half day planning for provision 80 supply
398 family support
1,320 feedback
bridges& stepping stones - see separate breakdown
Impact on outcomes & next steps to be accounted for in 2015/16 action planning:
Of the 6 children identified above – 4x made more than expected progress to achieve level 1b and one achieved 1a. 1x did not meet the expected standard however,
additional, long term provision is in place.
Focus / Barriers to learning / Desired outcomes / Success Criteria / Chosen Strategies / Research & Evaluation of Impact / Completed/monitoring / Cost inc cost per pupil
Identified from REC teaching over time April 15 – 4x children in Reception 3 of which are PP who are struggling to achieve the ELG because of PSED / Classroom observation suggests:
Issues with regard to taking turns – sharing –
Managing conflict. / Further develop children’s social engagement skills so that they do not become a barrier to learning in the future.
This area is already presenting as a barrier to achievement with reference to the early learning goal. / Observations demonstrate progression across and within months bands, given children’s starting points to reach the ELG at the end of Reception. / Introduce personalised learning logs to specifically target and track with particular strands of PSED- invite parents to be part of the children’s personalised log. / The Early Years EEF materials suggest that parental engagement, self-regulation strategies and social and emotional learning strategies – all can, given the right circumstances play a positive role in improving outcomes for children. With this in mind, the school has invited parents to be part of the children’s personalised logs but appreciates that this is at a very embryonic stage in terms of parental engagement in learning. / Louise hall
Anne Parker / £100 (per 4x students)
Impact on outcomes & next steps to be accounted for in 2015/16 action planning:
1 of 3 achieved the early learning goal – 2x have made significant gains in personalised provision, but not yet at the level where they can achieve the ELG. Specific next steps detailed with receiving teachers and to be monitored by Phase Leader. Changes to behaviour will require a longer term view of the strategies above
Expenditure 2014-2015
Area – Strategies and impact detailed above / Amount
3.5 Hours per week targeted at specific speech and language needs – TA time allocated / 1,412
Small sets in KS2 maths to address identified needs – 0.5 fte / 22,186
6 hours per week TA stepping stones programme directed at PP students and raising achievement in reading (EY’s/KS1) 12 weeks including assessment, planning, resources allocation / 2812
Matheletics – home school links and extension for more able / 1,400
Maths makes sense / 8,000
Language and literacy programme / 4,000
SENCO hours Of which 0.2 ring-fenced intervention / 9,911
1x afternoon per week admin for attendance – targeted at pp students / 2,348
Attendance voucher awards / 500
uniform assistance / 500
Rainbow room nurture group / 1,016
Data manager 1 day per week shared with sister school / 4266
County Sla and data analysis tool / 620
Subsidised breakfast club / 1,000
Early Years intervention teacher 0.5fte / 13,090
KS1 intervention teacher / 14,800
Timetabled provision for direct improvement time with the class teacher KS2 / 1,000
roots of empathy - year 1 pp students / 6,157
Homework club / 100
Bridges for writing 4 x hours per week over 10 weeks including parental workshops, planning and resource allocation / 2812
Stepping stones / 2812
Family support worker / 398
PP transition groups at bothal / 247
Precision teaching / 1,412
Small group RWInc / 1,412
Occupational therapy / 1,412
Fine motor skill intervention / 1,412
Individual reward plan / 40
Self - help/safety session / 0
Childcare / 350
107,425