Historical Pupil Premium

Pupil Premium 2016-17

1.  Summary information

School

Crook Primary School

Academic Year

2016-17

Total PP budget

£ 197,360

Date of most recent PP Review

20/1/2017

Total number of pupils

383 plus 58 nurser   nnursery

Number of pupils eligible for PP

39%

 

Date for next internal review of this strategy

09/17

 

2.  Current attainment

Y6 2015/2016

Pupils eligible for PP (your school)

Pupils not eligible for PP (national average)

% reaching age related expectations in Reading, Writing and Maths

48%

60%

% meeting standard or above in reading

65%

71%

% meeting standard or above in writing

65%

79%

% meeting standard or above in maths

65%

75%

Y2 2015/2016

% meeting standard or above in reading

63%

78%

% meeting standard or above in writing

63%

70%

% meeting standard or above in maths

63%

77%

3.  Barriers to future attainment (for pupils eligible for PP)

In-school barriers

 

PP pupils generally have few independent learning strategies so require highly structured and scaffolded lessons. Too few PP pupils reach combined outcomes for: English reading, writing and mathematics.

 

Separate nursery provision led to historically weak starting points entering into reception. Too few MAP PP exceed GLD

Transition from EYFS development groups expected and exceeding to KS1 for PP pupils is lower in the following areas:

reading –exceeding GLD to greater depth respectively

writing – expected and exceeding GLD  to greater depth

mathematics – expected and exceeding GLD  to greater depth

Transition from KS1 to KS2 to high standard

 

 

 

Emotional readiness for learning – lacking confidence and resilience. Mental wellbeing

External barriers

 

Limited access to wider enrichment / language activities.

 

Persistent absenteeism for PP pupils  

 

Mobility – inward and outward

 

 

Varied nursery provision resulting in low on entry data.

4.    Desired outcomes (Desired outcomes and how they will be measured)

Success criteria

 

To secure quality first teaching for disadvantaged pupils and raise standards

PP pupils are identified in each year group within class profiles and cross reference with SEN

Those PP pupils whose prior attainment would indicate they should reach expected standard in all subjects, will receive targeted intervention to ensure they reach combined outcomes.

Pupil progress meetings analyse assessment outcomes of key groups – referring back to starting points to analyse historical gaps and how well they are reducing..

 

Attainment improves and gaps narrow when compared to 2016

 

Transition from KS1 to KS2 demonstrates that more disadvantaged pupils reach the high standard than 2016.

Greater proportion of  PP EYFS group reach greater depth at end of KS1  

 

 

Provide therapeutic services and nurture provision for vulnerable PP pupils.

Targeted pupils show more resilience in lessons and are more able to access learning in the classroom environment.

 

Attendance – reducing the proportion of disadvantaged persistent absenteeism across the school. Of the pupils with attendance below 90%, 75% are identified PPG pupils  

Reduce PA on disadvantaged pupils

           

 

 

5.  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

1.    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?

 

Detailed cohort files identify PP pupils, including more able. Targets are set at the beginning of the academic year for end of year outcomes  that show accelerated progress to enable more pupils  to reach combined attainment outcomes  and higher standard

Research from The Sutton Trust has shown that good teachers have the most direct impact on student outcomes.

 

Teachers were not fully aware of the impact of mobility upon the size and dynamic of pupils groups.

 

Termly pupil progress meetings

Inclusion manager ensures all mobility is tracked and recorded within cohort files and staffs are informed of pupil movement.

HT DHT AHT

termly

 

Speech and oral language interventions including resources to help self regulation and independence.

Lesson observation of PP pupils identified that classrooms were not supporting pupils’ independently learning effectively. Learning walls were not accessible for PP pupils and therefore to supporting. Resources were not easily accessible  for pupils

Monitoring

Staff training

SLT

Spring Term

 

Remove  RWI.

Adjust the teaching sequence of phonemes so that PP pupil have access to all sounds before screening

Limited access to quality talk within the home resulted in PP pupils lower phonics screening outcomes

Highly structured RWI approach to writing limited PPG exposure to quality text and writing styles.

Monitoring

Staff training

SLT

Spring term and summer term review of results

 

3X Y6 classes

Reduce class size

Reduce class size to address high proportion of PP within the cohort (46%)

Outcomes low and gap wide for PP and other pupils

Monitoring

SLT

Spring term and summer term review of results

Resource management and monitoring costs

Additional teacher Y6     Additional support Year 1 phonics intervention PPG

 

 

 

 

 

Total budgeted cost

£ 48781

             

 

    i.   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?

 

Reading

individual targeted support for PP pupils in all year groups from Y1 to Y6

Daily reading KS1

3X weekly KS2

 

Secure expected standards for those PP pupils who were below at EYFS and KS1.

Reading records indicate that PP pupils are not heard to read daily at home

Monitoring on a termly basis through assessment review and data collection

SLT

April ‘17

July’17

 

Additional support for PP more able pupils to ensure they receive enrichment activities to develop verbal reasoning skills – link with Durham university

More PP pupils to reach combined greater depth / high outcomes

Monitoring on a termly basis through data collection

SLT

April ‘17

July’17

 

Booster Class  

Y6 Afternoon additional basic skills 1X week

 

Maths class Y2 & Y6  - 2 X hour per week

Bespoke support dedicated to the needs of individual pupils addresses misconceptions quickly and counters underachievement.

Analysis of data collection

DHT + Y6

July ‘17

 

Dedicated TA support delivering interventions

Support for:

Lexia

Reading intervention – word wasp and hornet

Lego therapy – 4X 30 min weekly sessions

Memory therapy – 4X30min weekly

Relaxation

S&L therapy – bespoke for individuals PP

 

Analysis of data collection

AHT Inclusion

April 17

 

Additional  2X TA  in  YR to reduce key worker groups

Weaker historical AOE data

Introduction of key worker system high proportion of PP with limited language

Assessment observation 

DHT

April 17

GLD

TA  employed full time to hear readers

Targeted member of staff for enrichment (half costs)

Targeted member of staff for language development / intervention

 Additional HTLA in Y2 to take focus group of PPG pupil to narrow all subjects 0.5

2X TA to reduce key worker group for PPG pupils

 

 

Total budgeted cost

114781

 

  ii.   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?

 

Appointed designated member of SLT for review of PP pupils

Increasing PP pupils,  increasing number of PP ever6

Variable gaps within assessment across the school

Outcomes academic

BOXALL assessment entry exit

AHT

Performance management review and final assessment

 

Develop nurture facility on site -

Access to outdoor learning  provision

Targeted PPG emotional readiness for learning barrier to learning

Improving attention

Improved mental health

AHT

Awaiting LA build

Plans approved

 

PSA - targeted to PP families to improve attendance and punctuality ad raise the importance  of   

3X days weekly

Many of our disadvantaged pupils have high PA than other pupils

 targeted to improve levels of attendance to impact  upon their academic achievement.

This will be monitored termly through attendance and punctuality reviews

PSA & HT

April ‘17

July’17

 

Induction programme in place for mobility

66% of all school mobility is associated with PP pupils

Need for accurate on entry assessment information and establishment of school expectations

Attendance and punctuality monitored

Emotional BOXALL assessment to ensure transition procedures are smooth 

AHT

ongoing

 

Pupils have access to therapeutic services including counselling

This provides support for social and emotional needs.

Targeted pupils will be tracked through data collection cycles

Reduced number of behavioural incidents recorded

AHT -inclusion

April ‘17

July’17

Total budgeted cost

34,356

Overall Spend

197,918

 


Pupil Premium 2015-16

Crook Primary was given £194,940 for the academic year 2015-16 for pupil premium. This money was used to fund support for vulnerable children in the following ways:

To provide PSA support two and a half  days per week

£13,329.50

Additional teacher in year 6 to narrow the gap by reducing class sizes.

£46,560

Additional part time teacher for intervention KS1

£28,657

 Additional  EYFS support to reduce size of key worker groups for pupil premium children

£40,308

Additional part time teacher for intervention KS 2

£27,567

To employ an  HLTA pupil premium children to develop resilience and emotional well being

£24,982

Additional support in Year 1 to close the gap for pupil premium children with phonics

£20, 151

 

Impact of Pupil Premium

The Parent Support Advisor has worked closely to support vulnerable families and as a school we have developed resilience and well- being to support vulnerable children. The “Relax Kids” approach has been introduced by the HLTA and we have a weekly resilience award.

Extra support in EYFS ensured that the “Good Level of Development” increased from 49% to 64%. Investment in read, Write, Inc as well as intervention groups and Read, Write Inc Lead Teacher ensured that in Year 1 phonics increased to 80% from 60%. 77% of pupil premium children passed the test compared to 82% of non -pupil premium children.

These intervention strategies also impacted on results in Year 2. Of the Pupil Premium children who were present in EYFS, 100% made expected progress in Reading with 61% making more than expected. 50% achieved a 2A+.

In writing. 100% made expected progress with 61% making more than expected. 33% achieved a 2A+.

In Maths based on Number results in EYFS, 100% made expected with 89% making more than expected.62% achieved a 2A+.

Year 6 results showed a similar picture of good progress for pupil premium children due to a high level of intervention. Gaps were minimal between FSM and Non FSM children at level 4 and progress in line with national expectations at level 5 from 2014 data. There is a gap in attainment between FSM and non FSM at level 5. However, 25% of FSM children are SEN compared to 9% of non FSM.

 

In reading 94% of FSM children achieved a level 4 compared to 91% of non FSM. 25% of FSM children achieved a level 5 compared to 35% of non FSM. 100% of FSM children made expected progress with 38% making more than expected. 97% of non FSM children made expected progress with 41% making more than expected.

In writing 88 % of FSM children achieved a level 4 compared to 97% of non FSM. 25% of FSM children achieved a level 5 compared to 53% of non FSM. 100% of FSM children made expected progress with 31% making more than expected. 100% of non FSM children made expected progress with 62% making more than expected.

In maths 94 % of FSM children achieved a level 4 compared to 94% of non FSM. 13% of FSM children achieved a level 5 compared to 47% of non FSM. 94% of FSM children made expected progress with 31% making more than expected. 94% of non FSM children made expected progress with 53% making more than expected.