Proposed spend of Pupil Premium - 2013/14
The Pupil Premium provides funding for pupils:



who have been in receipt of free school meals (FSM) at any point in the past 6 years (£900 per child)
who have been continuously looked after for the past six months (£900 per child)
for children whose parents are currently serving in the armed forces (£300 per child)
Schools are held accountable for the spending of these monies, performance tables will capture the achievement of disadvantaged students covered by the Pupil
Premium.
The Heath is committed to providing effective resources and ensuring vital support is in place for our disadvantaged students to improve their academic outcomes.
This document details the proposed spend of the Pupil Premium 2013/14.
A proportion of the Pupil Premium is committed to maintaining the provision for disadvantaged students that is currently in place.
Remainder of funds available 2013/14 - £140,000The four key objectives:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Transition: to improve transition outcomes for PP* students to bring attainment in line with expected levels of progress
Literacy: to establish a reading scheme to improve the reading age of students whose reading age is below national average
Engagement: to improve curriculum engagement and academic achievement for PP and CLA students
Attendance: to implement strategies addressing the attendance gap between for PP and CLA and non PP students
(*PP – referring to any student in receipt of Free School Meals in the past 6 years)
HN/Governors 2013
1. Key Objective: to improve transition outcomes for all Pupil Premium (PP) students to bring attainment in line with expected levels of
progress
Action : Deployment of LSAs/ additional intervention teacher (VS/EB)
LSA contracted to work additional hours to support intervention.
&
Intervention specialist teachers employed to remove barriers to learning, engage parents and enhance academic progress, working with students who are below
national expectation of attainment for Eng/ma.
Rational : Sutton document ‘One-to-one tutoring+5 months moderate impact’
‘For pupils eligible for free school meals (FSM) with lower prior attainment, those who received tuition were more likely to achieve Level 4 at KS2 and to make two
levels of progress than those who did not receive tuition.’
Evaluation of the Making Good Progress Pilot (2010). DCSF Research Report RR184. PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) LLP.
Success Criteria : A reduction in the attainment gap of PP and non non PP students in year 7 from Sept 2013 – June 2015 in mathematics and English levels
Dates
Sept 2013
Person responsible
HN
Monitoring and Evaluation
Tracking and monitoring data of PP cohort via data collection, student
feedback, exit data, progress coordinator data analysis within I&O.
Lesson obs schedule of intervention lessons as part of PM.
Cost
Per hr rate for LSAs
&
Part- time intervention teacher
E Birchenough – Full time salary
£37124/32.5 x 13 hours = £14850
pa
V Shaw – Full time salary
£31625/32.5 x 13 = £12650 pa
£27,500
LSA – 1 hr after school £3,000
£30,750
HN/Governors 2013
Action: Summer School Y6
Initial funding to be bid from DfES – PP summer school funding stream £250 per student attending (HN is applying for this fund) for approx 50 students £12 500
Identified cohort of PP and CLA students invited to attend Eng/ma
Summer school - specific focus on those in danger of not achieving nationally expected rates of progress. Student s who have an insecure L4 and secure L3 at KS2
will be targeted for this week long event.
Rational: Govt initiative to help disadvantaged students make a successful transition from primary to secondary school.
Sutton Trust document - Summer schools, moderate impact for moderate cost.
Reduce the traditional attainment dip between year 6 and year 7.
‘Summer schools boost the self esteem, aspirations and work ethic of more vulnerable children, many of whom are on Free School Meals.’ TES. David Linsell. 2012
Success Criteria : Students who attend summer school maintain/improve KS2 level in maths and English.
Dates
Person responsible
Monitoring and Evaluation
Cost
August 2013
HN
Data analysis KS2 – first Y7 data entry
£4,000 4 staff x 5 hours x 5
days x £25 + hours of prep
Inc. resources needed
Action: Implement 'Gold Literacy & Numeracy Intervention for Year 7 and 'Gold Literacy Intervention for year 8
Rational: Sutton document stresses that improving literacy improves student outcomes overall - increases GCSE attainment and thereby life choices.
Thereby reducing the attainment variation between E6 and non E6.
Dates
From Sept 2013
HN/Governors 2013
Person Responsible
HN
Monitoring and Evaluation
Data analysis KS2 –Y7 data, Y8 data
RA analysis
Lexia Analysis of Pupil Progress
Cost
£6000
additional class readers for
Year 7 & 8
£2000 intervention groups
headsets
Lexia reading scheme
£3500 (15 additional users)
2. Key Objective: Embed the reading scheme to improve the reading age of year 7 and year 8 students whose reading age is below national
average.
Action: Y7 reading scheme All students whose attainment falls below the national expectations for reading and functional literacy (RA 9 .6) are supported during
registration time by LSAs to follow reading scheme. Cohort identified from year 6 scores and from Term 1 RA data.
Rational: Sutton document stresses that improving literacy improves student outcomes overall.
Thereby reducing the attainment variation between PP and non PP.
Success Criteria: Reading levels improve to enable greater access to the curriculum. Reading age (RA) expected progress. Start RA – minimum expected progress
after 1 year: 6.0 - 6.5, 7.0 – 8.0, 7.5 – 9.0
Dates
Person responsible
Monitoring and Evaluation
Cost
Starting Sept 2013
SENDCO/HN
Reading level assessment at start of Y7 to identify
£2000
cohort. LSA assessment upon exit from the scheme.
Action : Reading champions Y9 students identified as Reading Champions, trained (by SENDCO) to provide reading support to the under achieving students.
Rational : Sutton Trust document Peer tutoring/peer-assisted learning, +6 months, High impact for low cost.
Parental involvement, +3 months, moderate impact for moderate costs.
‘All effective partnership schemes provide poorer readers with substantially increased time for reading, supported by a more skilled reader who has received
structured training and receives ongoing support. Focused training for the tutors is essential, so that they know what to do when a reader falters or makes an error’
What works for students with literacy difficulties? The effectiveness of intervention schemes. Third edition. DCSF. By G, Brooks. (2007)
‘Training parents to teach specific reading skills to their children – a particularly effective approach that can be more than twice as effective as encouraging parents
to listen to their children read.‘(Institute of Education – Review of Best Practice in Parental Engagement: Practitioners Summary, 2011)
Success Criteria: Year 9 Reading Champions successfully trained.
Training and commitment rewarded by the implementation of a Reading Champion award, recognising leadership and wider contribution to the school. (tba)
Y7 students reading age improves. Parents attend ‘how to support your child’s reading’ workshops. (tba) Investigate DBS clearance for ‘other’ adults to support the
reading scheme.
HN/Governors 2013
Dates
Sept 2013
Person responsible
Progress Champion
SENDCO/HN
Monitoring and Evaluation
Reading level assessment at start of Y7 to identify
cohort. Assessment upon exit from the scheme.
Cost
£400 for resources (inc
purchase of Reading
Champion School badges)
Action: Y8 reading scheme All students whose attainment falls below the national expectations for reading and functional literacy (RA 9 .6) are supported by
after school Readers Workshops run by LSAs. Cohort identified from year 7 scores and from Term 1 RA data.
Rational: Sutton document stresses that improving literacy improves student outcomes overall.
Thereby reducing the attainment variation between PP and non PP.
Success Criteria: Reading levels improve to enable greater access to the curriculum. Reading age (RA) expected progress. Start RA – minimum expected progress
after 1 year: 6.0 - 6.5, 7.0 – 8.0, 7.5 – 9.0
Dates
Person responsible
Monitoring and Evaluation
Cost
Starting Sept 2013
SENDCO/HN
Reading level assessment at start of Y8 to identify
£1000
cohort. LSA assessment upon exit from the scheme.
Dates
Sept 2013
Person responsible
Progress Champion
SENDCO/HN
Monitoring and Evaluation
Reading level assessment at start of Y8 to identify
cohort. Assessment upon exit from the scheme.
Cost
£400 for resources (inc
purchase of Reading
Champion School badges
and rewards for after
school attendance)
3. Key Objective: to improve curriculum engagement and academic achievement for E6 and CLA students
Action: Implement an academic subsidy to enable PP students to fully access the curriculum and reduce attainment gap.
Rational: Sutton document ‘the choices that schools make in allocating the money will be vital so that the funding can help raise pupils’ attainment and
aspirations.’
All framework holders may make a bid for this fund .Examples of spending may include revision guides, resources for technology, staffing for PP workshops etc, all
of which must have a direct impact curriculum attainment.
Success Criteria: Attainment gap between PP and non PP reduces. PP students make progress in line with expectations.
HN/Governors 2013
Dates
From Sept 2013
Person responsible
HN
Monitoring and Evaluation
Progress of students provided with support to be
monitored to ensure value for money. Departments to
justify spend in academic terms.
I&O termly review.
Cost
£23,000
Action: Implement an engagement subsidy to enable PP students to fully access the extra-curricular and financially dependent curriculum activities and reduce
attainment gap, support those students who do not have breakfast and support students with home-based learning by offering staff after school access.
Rational: National College Research cites effective embedded reward policies as being a contributory factor to improving attainment and engagement.
It is envisaged that students will use VIVOs for subsidising their own enrichment activities, e.g. prom and activity day.
Success Criteria: E6 cohort attendance of extracurricular and extended curriculum activities not inhibited by financial constraints
Dates
Sept 2013
Person responsible
HN
Monitoring and Evaluation
PP attendance of extended curriculum and LOTC
activities, activities day support.
Ensure breakfast available for any CLA/PP in need to
ensure an effective start to the school day (approx
£3k).
Staff Home-based learning support two days per week
(paid LSA)
Support PP students in peripatetic lessons
(£10,000)
Action: CLA students’ entitlement is met.
CLA identified cohort – monitor attainment and offer specific academic and emotional support as appropriate.
Rational: PEP reports must show how the PP has been spent on supporting the individual students in public care.
HN/Governors 2013
Cost
£30,000
Success Criteria: CLA make academic and social progress in line with peers.
Dates
Person responsible
Sept 2013
HN/JF/SLT inclusion
Monitoring and Evaluation
Progress of students to be monitored to ensure value
for money. Evaluation of spend via ½ termly PEP
report.
Departments to justify spend in academic terms for
any monies specifically requested for CLA.
Cost
14 x 900 = £12,600
Action: Academic Mentors – Training for current Mentors and any staff to ensure that skills needed for the removing barriers to academic success are up to date.
Rational: To equip mentors with skills necessary to aid in addressing academic barriers to learning and develop students study skills up to GCSE level.
Success Criteria : Student outcomes in line with expected levels of progress in Eng/ma, positive value added scores at KS4.
Mentors attend training.
Dates
Sept onwards.
Person responsible
SENDCO/line manager
Monitoring and Evaluation
Performance management
CPD genie and evaluation forms.
Tracking and monitoring of progress in Eng/ma of
students receiving academic mentoring.
Cost
£12500
Action: LSA – support for LSA to ensure effective support in the classroom
Rational: To equip LSAs with a laptop to support the skills necessary to aid in addressing academic barriers to learning.
Success Criteria : SEND/PP student outcomes in line with expected levels of progress in Eng/ma, positive value added scores at KS4.
Dates
Sept onwards.
Person responsible
SENDCO/line manager
Monitoring and Evaluation
Impact forms
Lesson obs
Fac minutes
Cost
£3150
4. Key Objective: Attendance: to implement strategies addressing the attendance gap between for PP and CLA and non PP students
Action: Redeploy key mentor hours as family Support worker, to engage with parents of PP Students in ensuring student attendance.
HN/Governors 2013
Rational: EEF ‘the choices that schools make in allocating the money will be vital so that the funding can help raise pupils’ attainment and aspirations.’
For example, at secondary level PP pupils are three times more likely than their peers to be classed as 'persistently absent' – i.e., to miss more than one in five
school days across the year. Similarly, PP pupils are three times more likely to receive two or more fixed-period exclusions across the year.
Success Criteria: Attendance gap between PP and non PP reduces.
Dates
Sept onwards.
Person responsible
HN/PCs
Monitoring and Evaluation
Performance management
CPD genie and evaluation forms.
Tracking and monitoring of progress in Eng/ma of
students receiving academic mentoring.
Cost
£14,000
Total proposed spend 2013/2014
£139,800
(of £140,00)
HN/Governors 2013