Deprivation presentation

Report
Deprivation – key facts





After prior attainment, poverty is the single most important factor in predicting
a child’s future life chances.
Attainment gaps between pupils from low income families and their more
affluent peers persist through all stages of education, including entry into
Higher Education. The facts speak for themselves.
The highest early achievers from deprived backgrounds are overtaken by
lower achieving children from advantaged backgrounds by age seven. By the
end of Key Stage 1 (age seven), the odds of a pupil eligible for Free School
Meals (FSM) achieving level 2 in reading, writing and maths are one third
those of a non-FSM pupil.
The gap widens further during secondary education and persists into Higher
Education. The odds of an FSM pupil achieving five or more GCSEs at A*-C
including English and mathematics are less than one third those of a non
FSM pupil.
A pupil from a non-deprived background is more than twice as likely to go on
to study at university as their deprived peers.
FSM (6) gap
KS2 L4+EM
FSM
Non-FSM
Gap
Hampshire
67%
86%
19%
National
68%
84%
16%
Hampshire
29%
63%
34%
National
39%
65%
26%
KS4 5A*C(EM)
Source DFE performance tables 2012
Pupil Premium - purpose
• Figures show that pupils who are eligible for free school
meals (FSM) underachieve considerably compared with
their non-FSM peers at every key stage.
• The Government therefore believes it is right that
additional funds are available to give the poorest children
who achieve less well a better start in life.
• The Pupil Premium, using additional resources from
outside the Schools Budget, is intended to address the
current inequalities by ensuring that funding to tackle
disadvantage reaches the pupils who need it most.
Important to note……
• Annual payment – as from 1st April £900 for
each FSM child
• £900 for every Ever 6 FSM – use Key to
Success website to check https://www.keytosuccess.education.gov.uk/
• £900 for each LAC in addition to DSG
• £300 for each Service Child
• £300 for each child of service person for up to
three years after they have left the service –
Ever 3
Important to note………
• Eligible parents were encouraged to register – FSM
• January census – 2013 17th January
• Eligible pupils have to be identified on a tracking
system
• The Pupil Premium has to be identified within school
budget
• Governors need to be informed of pupil premium
allocation, purpose and plans for spending
• Schools have to decide how to publish information –
how are parents going to access it - website
Ofsted Report February 2013 –
• Pupil Premium: How schools are spending the funding
successfully to maximise achievement is the follow up to
the report published in September 2012. The report is
based on visits made by Her Majesty’s Inspectors to 68
primary and secondary schools to see how effectively they
are spending their Pupil Premium funding. It is
accompanied by a series of tools that schools can use to
help them to analyse where there are gaps in achievement
between pupils who are eligible for the Pupil Premium and
those who are not, and to plan the action they need to
take.
• The report can be found on the Ofsted website:
www.ofsted.gov.uk
Successful schools shared the
following characteristics:
• carefully ring-fenced the funding so that they always spent it
on the target group of pupils
• never confused eligibility for the Pupil Premium with low ability,
and focused on supporting their disadvantaged pupils to
achieve the highest levels
• thoroughly analysed which pupils were underachieving,
particularly in English and mathematics, and why
• drew on research evidence and evidence from their own and
others’ experience to allocate the funding to the activities that
were most likely to have an impact on improving achievement
• understood the importance of ensuring that all day-to-day
teaching meets the needs of each learner, rather than relying
on interventions to compensate for teaching that is less than
good
• allocated their best teachers to teach intervention groups to
improve mathematics and English, or employed new teachers
who had a good track record in raising attainment in those
subjects
• used achievement data frequently to check whether
interventions or techniques were working and made adjustments
accordingly, rather than just using the data retrospectively to see
if something had worked
• made sure that support staff, particularly teaching assistants,
were highly trained and understood their role in helping pupils
to achieve
• systematically focused on giving pupils clear, useful feedback
about their work, and ways that they could improve it
• ensured that a designated senior leader had a clear overview
of how the funding was being allocated and the difference it was
making to the outcomes for pupils
• ensured that class and subject teachers knew which pupils
were eligible for the Pupil Premium so that they could take
responsibility for accelerating their progress
• had a clear policy on spending the Pupil Premium, agreed by
governors and publicised on the school website
• provided well-targeted support to improve attendance,
behaviour or links with families where these were barriers to a
pupil’s learning
• had a clear and robust performance management system for
all staff, and included discussions about pupils eligible for the
Pupil Premium in performance management meetings
• thoroughly involved governors in the decision making and
evaluation process
• were able, through careful monitoring and evaluation, to
demonstrate the impact of each aspect of their spending on
the outcomes for pupils.
Inspectors found where schools were less successful
in spending the funding, they tended to have at least
some of the following characteristics. They:
• had a lack of clarity about the intended impact of the spending
• spent the funding indiscriminately on teaching assistants,
with little impact
• did not monitor the quality and impact of interventions well
enough, even where other monitoring was effective
• did not have a good performance management system for
teaching assistants and other support staff
• did not have a clear audit trail for where the funding had been
spent
• focused on pupils attaining the nationally expected level at the
end of the key stage (Level 4, five A* to C grades at GCSE) but
did not to go beyond these expectations, so some more able
eligible pupils underachieved
• planned their Pupil Premium spending in isolation to their
other planning, for example, it was not part of the school
development plan
• compared their performance to local rather than national
data, which suppressed expectations if they were in a lowperforming local authority
• compared the performance of their pupils who were eligible for
free school meals with other eligible pupils nationally, rather
than all pupils, again lowering expectations
• did not focus their pastoral work on the desired outcomes for
pupils and did not have any evidence to show themselves
whether the work had or had not been effective
• did not have governors involved in making decisions about
the Pupil Premium, or challenging the way in which it was
allocated.
Ofsted Subsidiary Guidance
February 2013
Evaluating the school’s use of the pupil premium
• It is for schools to decide how the pupil premium is
spent. However, they are accountable for their use
of this funding. Since September 2012, schools
have been required to publish online information
about their pupil premium allocation and how they
plan to spend it this year. They must also publish a
statement of how they spent the money for the
previous year and its impact on the attainment of
pupils eligible for support through the pupil premium.
This is intended to ensure that parents and others are
made fully aware of the impact on the attainment of
pupils covered by the pupil premium.
•
When evaluating the effectiveness of leaders,
managers and governors, inspectors should gather
evidence about the use of the pupil premium in
relation to the following key issues:
–
–
–
the level of pupil premium funding received by the school
in the current academic year and levels of funding
received in previous academic years
how the school has spent the pupil premium and why it
has decided to spend it in the way it has
any differences made to the learning and progress of
pupils eligible for the pupil premium as shown by
performance data and inspection evidence.
LAC
•
In many schools the number of
looked-after children is small and
these pupils may not figure in headline
performance data. Inspectors should
record evidence of the impact of the
pupil premium on looked-after children
currently on roll in the school on a
separate evidence form.
Impact of pupil premium and
Year 7 catch-up
•
Inspectors must consider the difference between the average points
scores in each of English and mathematics in national assessments
at the end of Key Stage 2, and at GCSE at the end of Key Stage 4,
for the following groups:
–
–
–
•
those pupils known to be eligible for free school meals and all other
pupils (FSM and non-FSM pupils)
children who are looked after and all other pupils (CLA and non-CLA)
children of service families and all other pupils. (This information is not
contained in RAISEonline but inspectors will expect schools to provide it
during the inspection.)
Inspectors must evaluate the performance in English and in
mathematics of groups of pupils who are supported through the pupil
premium. Where a gap is identified between the performance of
these pupils and all others in the school, inspectors must report this
and whether it is narrowing. They should express gaps in terms of
National Curriculum levels or a period of time (such as ‘two terms’) at
the end of Key Stage 2, or GCSE grades at the end of Key Stage 4.
Planned activities in
Hampshire
•
Eight half day ‘Narrowing the Gap - Effective of your pupil
premium’ training courses for Headteachers/designated
teachers taking place on:
–
–
–
–
•
•
•
•
11th March – 9-12 and 1-4
7th June – 9-12 and 1-4
10th June – 9-12 and 1-4
20th June – 9-12 and 1-4
Training for Governors through Governor Forums – 26th and
28th February and 11th March with further sessions being
organised for the Summer Term
Whole Governor Board training in schools
Michelle Cain and Glyn Wright to create a best practice guide
Survey of all schools websites completed
Useful further reading
• The Pupil premium – making it work in your
school – www.oxfordprimary.co.uk
• Ofsted – press release – www.ofsted.gov.uk
• Download of historical free school meals
eligibility Department of Education – any
questions Email
[email protected]
• Pupil Premium 2013-14 – Pupil number
Information for the Illustrative Allocations DfE

similar documents