Briefing on the Pupil Premium
This briefing provides guidance on issues related to the Pupil Premium in
schools in England. It sets out key facts about the Pupil Premium and
highlights some important concerns that have arisen following its introduction.
It describes key principles that should guide the development of schools’
polices and practices in respect of the Pupil Premium.
Pupil Premium funding
The Pupil Premium is discrete funding given to state funded schools and other
educational settings in England, including special and alternative provision, to
support disadvantaged and vulnerable pupils from Reception to Year 11. The
Pupil Premium programme applies pupils in academies and free schools as
well as those enrolled at maintained schools.
For the academic year 2014/15, the annual level of Pupil Premium funding
has been set at £1,300 per pupil of primary school age and £900 per pupil of
secondary school age for each pupil who has been eligible for free school
meals (FSM) at any point during the last six years. This money is passported
directly to schools to spend as they determine appropriate.
Additional Pupil Premium funding is made available for every child who has
been looked after by their local authority for at least one day, is adopted or
has left care under a Special Guardianship Order or a Residence/Child
Arrangements Order issued by a court. This funding has been set at £1,900
per pupil for the academic year 2014/15. The Pupil Premium for looked after
children is managed by the Virtual School Head (VSH) in each local authority.
While there is no legal requirement for the VSH to pass Pupil Premium money
to schools, they are under a ‘strong expectation’ from the Department for
Education (DfE) that they should distribute a proportion of this funding to
schools.
A Service Premium has also been created for eligible pupils who have at least
one parent who has served in the armed forces or who has done so within the
last three years. Pupils whose parents have died in active service and are in
receipt of a pension under the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme (AFCS)
and the war Pension Scheme (WPS) are also eligible for the Service
premium. For 2014/15, the annual value of the Service Premium has been set
at £300 per eligible pupil.
Accountability for the Pupil Premium
The DfE has established no statutory restrictions on the way in which Pupil
Premium funding should be used by schools. Therefore, in principle,
headteachers and governing bodies are free to use the Pupil Premium
funding at their discretion.
However, schools are held to public account for their use of Pupil Premium
funding through:

performance tables, which show the performance of disadvantaged
pupils compared with their peers;

a requirement on every school to publish an annual report of their use
of Pupil Premium funding and to make this report available online; and

Ofsted inspection of the effectiveness of schools’ arrangements for
supporting
the
progress
and
achievement
of
vulnerable
and
disadvantaged pupils, particularly those responsible for the Pupil
Premium.
In relation to inspection, recent publications from Ofsted have highlighted the
significant emphasis placed by inspectors on the use of the Pupil Premium in
2
reaching overall judgements about the effectiveness of leadership and
management in schools.
Concerns about the use of the Pupil Premium in schools
The NASUWT is clear that a characteristic feature of a fair national funding
system for schools is that it meaningful provision for the additional barriers to
learning faced by disadvantaged children. However, the Union has continued
to express significant concerns about the basis upon which the Pupil Premium
programme has been established and its resulting implications for teachers,
school leaders and learners.
In particular, it is important to recognise that for the majority of schools, the
Pupil Premium does not represent additional funding. Overall, funding for
schools has continued to decline in real terms since 2010/11. Even taking the
Pupil Premium into account, the substantial majority of schools will have
experienced a real-terms reduction in funding over the period 2010/11 to
2014/15.1
Independent research has confirmed that these financial constraints have
promoted practices across the school sector in which Pupil Premium funding
is allocated to areas within schools’ budgets other than those related to
supporting eligible pupils.2 It is evident that the absence of any mechanism to
ensure that schools make appropriate use of Pupil Premium funding has
created clear opportunities for these practices to become more firmly
established within schools.
1
Chowdry, H. and Sibieta, L. (2011). School funding reform: an empirical analysis of options
for a national funding formula. Briefing note BN 123. Institute for Fiscal Studies; London.
2 National Foundation for Educational Research in England and Wales (NFER) (2014).
‘Teacher Voice panel provides Pupil Premium insights’. (13 June)
(http://www.nfer.ac.uk/about-nfer/media-and-events/nfer-teacher-voice-panel-provides-pupilpremium-insights.cfm), accessed on 11/08/14.
3
An added complexity reported by teachers and school leaders is that Pupil
Premium funding is often combined with other areas of school budgets
focused on tackling educational disadvantage and supporting pupils perceived
as making inadequate progress, whether or not these pupils are eligible for
the Pupil Premium.3 While provision may be organised on this basis for sound
educational and financial reasons, schools adopting such practices have
experienced some difficulties in demonstrating that Pupil Premium funding is
being used in ways that reflect national expectations.
As a result of these pressures, teachers increasingly report that they are
being placed under significant pressure to track, monitor and report on the
progress of pupils eligible for the Pupil Premium in circumstances where it is
not clear that the additional funding received by schools is being spent for the
benefit of these pupils. The NASUWT is also aware of attempts in some
schools to establish specific performance targets for Pupil Premium pupils
without any coherent strategic plan to ensure that Pupil Premium funding is
used to support their learning.
Even in schools where headteachers and governors have decided to allocate
Pupil Premium funding to promote the progress and achievement of eligible
pupils, evidence confirms that some activities supported by this funding are
unlikely to assist their progress and achievement.4 NASUWT members also
report approaches to the Pupil Premium that are unnecessarily burdensome
and that distract teachers and school leaders from focusing on their core
responsibilities for teaching and leading teaching and learning.
KEY PRINCIPLES OF EFFECTIVE PRACTICE
3
Carpenter, H., Papps, I., Bragg, J., Dyson, A., Harris, D., Kerr, K., Todd, L. & Laing, K.
(2013) Evaluation of Pupil Premium. Department for Education Research Report 282
(https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/243919/DFERR282.pdf), accessed on 18/08/14.
4 Ofsted (2013). The Pupil Premium: How schools are spending the funding successfully to
maximise achievement (http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/pupil-premium-how-schools-arespending-funding-successfully-maximise-achievement), accessed on 18/08/14.
4
It is important to recognise that the ways in which the needs of disadvantaged
pupils can be met most effectively depend on the particular context and
circumstances faced by individual schools. It is therefore not possible to
prescribe detailed approaches to the use of Pupil Premium that will be
appropriate in all circumstances.
However, the NASUWT has identified key principles that should inform the
development of Pupil Premium-related practice in schools and that can be
used to assess the acceptability of existing or proposed approaches to
meeting the needs of Pupil Premium eligible pupils. These principles are set
out below.
Schools must establish clear strategies for the use of their Pupil
Premium funding
While the NASUWT recognises that pressures on general school budgets
remain significant, it is important that schools establish coherent and
transparent strategies that confirm the way in which Pupil Premium funding
will be used to support the pupils for whom it is intended. This will not only
allow schools to meet their legal obligation to publish details of their allocation
of Pupil Premium funding, it also secures the confidence of teachers,
members of the wider school workforce, parents and other stakeholders that
this funding is being used for its intended purposes.
The implementation of effective whole school Pupil Premium strategies
provides an important opportunity for teachers and other staff working with
disadvantaged pupils to contribute their skills, knowledge and experience to
the development of schools’ policies in this area. This approach also allows
staff to develop a genuine sense of ownership of the strategies adopted in
their schools and promotes the highest possible levels of consistency of
practice.
5
Pupil Premium practices should not add to teacher or school leader
workload or undermine their contractual entitlement to a work-life
balance
The NASUWT is clear that all teachers are entitled to a satisfactory work-life
balance. Headteachers and governors have a statutory and common law duty
under health and safety legislation to have regard to the health and welfare of
employees.
It is therefore essential that strategies adopted within schools to meet the
needs of Pupil Premium eligible pupils do not lead to unacceptable increases
in teacher and school leader workload nor undermine their statutory and
contractual entitlement to a reasonable work-life balance. This is particularly
important in relation to attempts to impose unwieldy and burdensome pupil
tracking and record-keeping arrangements. Schools must therefore ensure
that all existing Pupil Premium-related practices are workload impact
assessed and are agreed by the NASUWT. Any proposed approaches to
meeting the needs of Pupil Premium eligible pupils must also be subject to a
workload impact assessment and be agreed with the NASUWT.
These provisions are set out in the NASUWT’s national action short of strike
action instructions. The instructions enable NASUWT members to secure
strategies for the Pupil Premium that avoid negative workload-related
consequences for teachers and school leaders and provide protection against
the imposition of practices that are unacceptable in this respect. Further
information and advice on the Union’s action short of strike action instructions
can be accessed at www.nasuwt.org.uk/industrialaction.
Teachers’ performance management objectives must not include crude
data-related progress and achievement targets
While performance data can provide a useful means of supporting
professional dialogue about the attainment and progress of Pupil Premium
6
eligible pupils, such data is unable to reflect the totality of pupils’
achievements or to serve as the principal means by which the effectiveness of
teachers’ professional practice can be evaluated. As with all pupils, the
progress and achievement of disadvantaged pupils as measured by
performance data is affected to a significant extent by factors beyond the
direct control of teachers.
This has important implications for the way in which performance
management arrangements in schools seek to address teachers’ work with
Pupil Premium eligible pupils. In particular, the limitations of pupil
performance data mean that it is inappropriate for specific data-related targets
for disadvantaged pupils to be included as performance management
objectives or success criteria. Teachers should seek to resist objectives or
success criteria of this nature and should seek advice and assistance from the
NASUWT if they experience difficulties in this respect.
The NASUWT has produced a dedicated briefing for members on the
appropriate
use
of
performance
data,
accessible
at
www.nasuwt.org.uk/performancedata. This briefing describes the basis upon
which such data can inform the performance management process
appropriately, support the progress and attainment of pupils and contribute to
whole-school approaches to maintaining and raising standards of educational
achievement.
The NASUWT has produced a practical guide to performance management
that contains advice on the setting of objectives and other key aspects of the
performance management process. The practical guide has been distributed
to members directly. The Union has also produced an audiovisual
presentation on performance management that addresses data-related pupil
performance
targets.
The
presentation
can
be
accessed
at
www.nasuwt.org.uk/performancemanagement.
7
Teachers should not be required to maintain additional pupil progress
and achievement records for Pupil Premium eligible pupils
It is important that schools have effective systems in place to assess the
progress and achievement of all pupils, including those eligible for the Pupil
Premium. However, it is not appropriate for schools to seek to impose
additional requirements in respect of the assessment of Pupil Premium
eligible pupils. Fit for purpose whole school assessment and record keeping
systems, including those focused on pupils with special educational needs,
should provide sufficient data to monitor the performance of these Pupil
Premium eligible pupils and to evaluate the effectiveness of related activities
and interventions.
The imposition of additional assessment and record keeping requirements in
respect of Pupil Premium eligible pupils not only risks increasing teacher and
school leader workload burdens as a result of replication of assessments of
pupil progress and attainment, but can also undermine the coherence and
consistency of cross-school assessment frameworks.
Strategies for using Pupil Premium funding should be based on
evidence
Schools should seek to ensure that their use of Pupil Premium funding is
guided by evidence of the effectiveness and value for money of interventions
that aim to support the progress and achievement of disadvantaged pupils.
Evidence should not only inform decisions about the introduction of new Pupil
Premium-related strategies but should also support the evaluation of existing
practices.
The Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) has produced an online toolkit
that can be used to support the development and evaluation of schols’ Pupil
Premium
strategies.
The
toolkit
is
available
at
educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk. It describes 34 commonly used
8
approaches to meeting the needs of disadvantaged pupils and summarises
evidence of their effectiveness and value for money.
The EEF makes clear that its toolkit is not a substitute for the professional
judgement of teachers and school leaders about the ways in which Pupil
Premium funding might be used most effectively. However, the toolkit can be
used to inform professional dialogue about approaches to meeting the needs
of disadvantaged pupils and to challenge potentially inappropriate practices.
Ofsted’s reviews of the implementation of the Pupil Premium have noted
schools’ use of the toolkit positively.5
Notwithstanding the evaluations of the effectiveness and value for money of
interventions contained in the EEF toolkit, it is important that any intervention
adopted in schools also reflects the principles of practice described elsewhere
in this briefing.
Pupil Premium strategies should recognise the important role played by
teaching assistants in promoting pupil progress and achievement
The NASUWT is concerned by reports that some schools have identified the
deployment of teaching assistants as a relatively ineffective approach to
addressing the education needs of disadvantaged pupils. The Union is aware
that this view is based to a significant extent on an inappropriate interpretation
of the implications of research commissioned by the former Department for
Children Schools and Families (DCSF).6 This research has been cited as
evidence that teaching assistants have a limited or, in some instances,
negative impact on pupils’ learning and that, as a result, teaching assistants
represent an inefficient use of Pupil Premium funding.
5
ibid.
6
Blatchford, P.; Bassett, P.; Brown, P.; Koutsoubou, M.; Martin, C.; Russell, A. and Webster,
R. with Rubie-Davies, C. (2009). The impact of support staff in schools. Results from the
Deployment and Impact of Support Staff project. (Strand 2 Wave 2) (DCSF-RR148).
Department for Children, Schools and Families; London.
9
However, later work undertaken by the authors of the DCSF research
confirms that if teaching assistants are deployed and supported effectively,
they can make a powerful contribution to pupils’ progress and achievement. 7
Critically, this research confirms that when teachers and teaching assistants
are given sufficient time to work together in order to plan and prepare pupils’
learning activities, the deployment of teaching assistants is able to promote
significant improvements in pupil outcomes.
NASUWT members should therefore be confident in resisting arguments that
use of Pupil Premium funding to invest in schools’ teaching assistant
workforce is inefficient or educationally ineffective.
7
Russell, A.; Webster, R. and Blatchford, P. (2013). Maximising the impact of teaching
assistants: Guidance for school leaders and teachers. Routledge; Oxford.
10