Pupil Premium Impact 2016-17

Review Of Pupil Premium Funding 2016/17 Desired outcome

Chosen action/approach

Estimated impact: Did you meet the success criteria? Include impact on pupils not eligible for PP, if appropriate.

Lessons learned (and whether you will continue with this approach)

Achievement gap between PP students and national non-PP to close

Staffing - PP Focused Time.

2016-17 in school achievement differences between eligible and non-eligible students across all key stages and year groups.

2016-17 in school GCSE exam data between school eligible and non-eligible students: P8 = -0.64 English = -0.56 Maths = -0.8 Ebacc = -0.57 Open = -0.69

Staff more aware of the eligible students in their classes.

Staff aware of strategies to use to target eligible students and to improve their progress Eligible student progress all staff and whole school key priority

Progress 8 score of school’s PP students and national average of non-PP students to be less than or equal to 0.2

Staff with an eligible student focus to be structured and to have specific staff that hold their performance to account and to guide their work with eligible students Continue but adapt to provide information on specific roles to allow easier analysis of staff impact on eligible student progress

Achievement gap between PP students and national non-PP to close Progress 8 score of school’s PP students and national average of non-PP students to be less than or equal to 0.2

Staffing – TLR holders to in English, maths and science to have specific PP student focus

2016-17 in school achievement differences between eligible and non-eligible students across all key stages and year groups.

2016-17 in school GCSE exam data between school eligible and non-eligible students: P8 = -0.64 English = -0.56 Maths = -0.8 Ebacc = -0.57 Open = -0.69

TLR holders in Key Subjects (Maths, English and Science) also had other responsibilities alongside the specific focus on eligible student progress in their Curriculum Areas.

To be continued but to adapt the TLR posts so that the member of staff in this role to only focus on the outcomes and progress of eligible students in their teams.

Achievement gap between PP students and national non-PP to close

Staffing – Appointment of Assistant Leader of Disadvantaged students.

2016-17 in school achievement differences between eligible and non-eligible students across all key stages and year groups.

2016-17 in school GCSE exam data between school eligible and non-eligible students: P8 = -0.64 English = -0.56 Maths = -0.8 Ebacc = -0.57 Open = -0.69

Greater emphasis on eligible students at a whole school level. Staff led by member of staff with regard strategies and information regarding student progress.

Staff member informed governing body of eligible student strategy and progress.

Member of staff to work with staff in key subject areas with a designated eligible student focus.

Member of staff to monitor the work of PP Champions and Progress Managers more rigourously.

KS3 Targeted Intervention

Differences exist in progress between eligible and non-eligible students still evident at KS3.

Greater communication with parents needed.

Automated text system to be implemented and used.

Progress 8 score of school’s PP students and national average of non-PP students to be less than or equal to 0.2

Achievement gap between PP students and national non-PP to close

PP students to be targeted for early intervention in English, Maths and Science

Attendance at KS3 intervention improving.

Students that attend the KS3 intervention evenings regularly (over 50% of sessions) have shown positive signs of progress.

Achievement gap between PP students and national non-PP to close Progress 8 score of school’s PP students and national average of non-PP students to be less than or equal to 0.2

Year 11 Targeted Intervention PP Students with predicted negative Progress 8 score to receive targeted intervention

2016-17 in school GCSE exam data between school eligible and non-eligible students: P8 = -0.64 English = -0.56 Maths = -0.8 Ebacc = -0.57 Open = -0.69

Greater level of student reward for those students who attend on a regular basis.

Eligible student attendance at KS4 intervention significantly lower than non-eligible students Targeted student cohort to be reduced to ensure impact and implementation of the intervention programme is more effective.

Progress Meetings at KS4 level showing greater communication amongst and targeting of students.

To be continued but the process to be adapted, alternative in school intervention programme for eligible students to be created.

Achievement gap between PP students and national non-PP to close Progress 8 score of school’s PP students and national average of non-PP students to be less than or equal to 0.2

Interventions including mentoring, anger management and counselling. Additional schooling at Easter and on Saturdays during the Spring term to ensure we are meeting the needs of disadvantaged students.

2016-17 A 30% difference existed in the total days lost to exclusion between eligible and non-eligible students.

Avg. Achievement Points Eligible = 237 Non-eligible = 256 2016-17 in school GCSE exam data between school eligible and non-eligible students: P8 = -0.64 English = -0.56 Maths = -0.8 Ebacc = -0.57 Open = -0.69 Saturday School Impact: P8 All -0.42 P8 Any Saturday class -0.27 Maths Progress All -0.68 Maths Progress Saturday -0.04 Science Progress All (EBacc) -0.31 Science Progress Saturday (EBacc) -0.443 English Progress All -0.62 English Progress Saturday -0.90

Interventions need specific breakdown to be able to monitor the impact of the strategy more effectively.

Eligible students attendance at holiday period interventions significantly lower than non-eligible students This intervention to be continued but not focussed to eligible students. New in school intervention programme to be established to target eligible students.

Achievement gap between PP students and national non-PP to close

Staffing – member of staff appointed to work with students to improve resilience

Progress 8 score of school’s PP students and national average of non-PP students to be less than or equal to 0.2

2016-17 A 30% difference existed in the total days lost to exclusion between eligible and non-eligible students.

Avg. Achievement Points Eligible = 237 Non-eligible = 256

More structured process for targeting students that require support with resilience.

Staff that deliver interventions for targeted students to provide quantitative and qualitative information before and after each half term.

One member of staff to provide information to staff that deliver the interventions.

Key stakeholders to provide relevant information to this staff member.

Improve the resilience of PP students

Caseloads to be reviewed on a more consistent basis To be continued but adapted for students to work with two “Life Coaches.”

Improve social and cultural experiences of PP students

Cultural Citizens Programme

Targeted eligible students improved their average behaviour for learning scores.

Before programme the average behaviour for learning for eligible students was 56.5% (good or above) after the programme the figure was 60.6% (good or above) All students that took part re ceived a ‘Level One’ Arts Award from the Arts Council.

Students appeared more motivated to learn.

Students gained ‘cultural capital’ and provided life experiences that, they previously had not been able to access.

All students that took part received a ‘Level One’ Arts Award from the Arts Council.

Promote PP attendance to school intervention programmes

Rewards

Eligible student attendance at school intervention minimal in comparison to non-eligible students.

P8 All -0.42 P8 Any Saturday class -0.27 Maths Progress All -0.68 Maths Progress Saturday -0.04 Science Progress All (EBacc) -0.31 Science Progress Saturday (EBacc) -0.443 English Progress All -0.62 English Progress Saturday -0.90

Improved attendance of PP students

Staffing – Pupil Welfare Officer

2016-17 Eligible student attendance = 92.8% Whole school attendance figure = 94.4% 2017-18 Eligible student attendance at 94% Currently 1.6% higher than this time last academic year.

Behaviour of PP students improves, measured by reduction in school behaviour points given to PP students and reduction of days exclusion for PP students

SOLO room

2016-17 A 30% difference existed in the total days lost to exclusion between eligible and non-eligible students.

Avg. Achievement Points Eligible = 237 Non-eligible = 256

Eligible student attendance significantly lower than non-eligible students (13% of students attended were eligible, Saturday school: 20.5% of students that attended were eligible) Continue to run intervention outside school hours and reward students that attend.

Seek alternative intervention times within school hours, started registration intervention. Targeted eligible students)

Earlier attendance intervention appears to be more effective with eligible students Student ownership and target setting in relation to their own attendance having positive impact Rewards for 100% attendance having positive impact To be continued

Provides opportunities for students at risk of exclusion to complete supervised work and still access school curriculum.

To be continued

Achievement gap between PP students and national non-PP to close

Improved attendance of PP families at school events

Achievement gap between PP students and national non-PP to close

All staff to have PP focused target on their appraisal for the academic year 2016-17

Additional Progress Evenings for targeted PP students and their families

Provision of set texts for GCSE exam courses for PP students Cover the costs of essential trips for GCSE subjects for PP students

2016-17 in school achievement differences between eligible and non-eligible students across all key stages and year groups.

2016-17 in school GCSE exam data between school eligible and non-eligible students: P8 = -0.64 English = -0.56 Maths = -0.8 Ebacc = -0.57 Open = -0.69

Provides opportunities to provide evidence of specific strategies that staff have completed for eligible students.

Ran additional progress evenings for targeted eligible students.

Attendance of eligible student families consistently lower than non-eligible families.

30% of targeted eligible student families attended despite phone calls, texts, letters, prizes, food all being available

Alternative approaches to be investigated for eligible families.

2016-17 in school GCSE exam data between school eligible and non-eligible students: P8 = -0.64 English = -0.56 Maths = -0.8 Ebacc = -0.57 Open = -0.69

Monitor more closely the impact this intervention on the progress of the students that were provided with set resources to improve outcomes

Disadvantaged student leader to investigate opportunity to hold copies of Disadvantaged students appraisal targets for staff.

Not all Curriculum areas request this approach; roll out to core subjects to diminish differences that appear.