Thought of the Week

By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.

Hebrews 11:2

Pupil Premium

PUPIL PREMIUM
The Pupil Premium is finance given to schools with the specific aim of improving the outcomes of young people from less advantaged backgrounds. Nationally, there is a significant difference in the educational achievement of pupils who receive or have received Free School Meals than those who do not, for instance. The same is true of children who are in the care of Local Authorities.

Most of these pupils do make expected or more than expected progress at Hartford Church of England High School but the Pupil Premium is the mechanism for distributing the funding at a national level.

HARTFORD CE HIGH SCHOOL : Pupil Premium Strategy Statement 2016-2017 (Please click HERE for a downloadable version of this information)

1.   Summary information
School HARTFORD CE HIGH SCHOOL
Academic Year 2016 – 2017 Total PP budget £186,565 Date of most recent PP Review SEPT 2016
Total number of pupils 900 Number of pupils eligible for PP 216 Date for next internal review of this strategy MAR 2017

 

2.   Current attainment (YEAR 11 LEAVERS 2015 – 2016: 43 STUDENTS)  
Pupils eligible for PP

(national: 2015)

HCEHS Pupils eligible for PP 2016 Pupils not eligible for PP (national: 2015)
% achieving 5A* – C incl. EM 36 51 63
% achieving expected progress in English 58 76 74
% achieving expected progress in Mathematics 49 60 72
% Achieving Basics (A* – C in both English and Mathematics) 39 60 65
% achieving A* – C in English 51 65   (67 Lit or Lang) 73
% achieving A* – C in Mathematics 49 60 74
Hartford PP student KS2 mean score (Non-PP) 4.24 (4.82)
Hartford PP student CAT score (Non-PP) 93.7 (103.6)
Progress 8 score average (from 2016/17) TBC TBC TBC

 

3.   Barriers to future attainment (for pupils eligible for PP including high ability)
Our approach to ensuring that our disadvantaged students achieve well in school is one that is based on focused support, evidenced by the needs of students as well as the growing body of educational research around this issue. In September 2015 we completely overhauled our approach to intervention with Pupil Premium students after 3 years of data that led to academic outcomes for this group that was in line with national figures for these students; but we were not closing the gap quickly enough when comparing these students to non-Pupil Premium students nationally. In essence, the reality of our approach is to try to replicate the general advantages held by non-disadvantaged students whose performance at the school is usually outstanding. The figures above suggest we have had great success in narrowing that gap in 2016 and we expect that trend to continue in future years as the approach is refined still further and the fruits of intervention with Pupil Premium students throughout their five years at Hartford are harvested.
In-school barriers (issues to be addressed in school, such as poor literacy skills)
A.     Literacy skills in Year 7 are lower for pupils eligible for PP than for other pupils. This prevents them from making good progress in Year 7 and continues to impact on educational performance throughout their school life and life chances after leaving education. Statistically there is a disproportionate number of students eligible for PP who are also low ability on entry (KS2 APS and CAT scores) and SEN.

2016 Exam cohort at point of entry in Y7

APS (from Aspire) CATS Read Test Mark (/50)
PPI Non PPI PPI Gap PPI Non PPI PPI Gap PPI Non PPI PPI Gap
25.2 28.8 -3.6 93.7 103.6 -9.9 24.5 33.4 -8.9
B. The proportion of students who receive fixed term exclusions or time in the school’s internal Referral Unit is higher amongst Pupil Premium students.
External barriers (issues which also require action outside school, such as low attendance rates)
C. Attendance rate for students eligible for PP in 2015 – 2016 is 91.5%, (non-PP = 96.2%) below the target for all children of 97%; although this figure is skewed significantly by the impact of a handful of students. This reduces their school hours and is a factor contributing to some of them making less than expected progress.

 

4.   Outcomes
Desired outcomes and how they will be measured Success criteria
A.     Literacy and numeracy skills
  • Students eligible for PP in Year 7 make at least as much progress by the year end as non-PP students so that at least 50% exceed progress targets and 80% meet expected targets
  • This will be evidenced using accelerated reader assessments and English written assessments
B.     Fixed term exclusions/use of Referral Unit
  • Fewer incidents of On Call for PP students
  • Fewer fixed term exclusions for PP students
  • Fewer PP students using internal RU
C.     Attendance
  • Reduce the number of persistent absentees (PA) among students eligible for PP to below 10%.
  • Overall attendance among pupils eligible for PP improves to 95% .
5.   Planned expenditure
Academic year 2016/17
The headings below enable us to demonstrate how we are using the Pupil Premium to provide targeted support and support whole school strategies.
A LITERACY AND NUMERACY SKILLS: YEAR 7
Desired outcome What will happen Success Criteria Implementation Staff lead Review
Improved Year 7 Literacy progress
  • Focused teaching and assessment that employs Purposeful Practice
  • Targeted intervention
  • Accelerated reader
  • NGRT and CAT assessment and analysis
  • Summer school
  • Students eligible for PP in Year 7 make at least as much progress by the end of the year as non-PP students so that at least 50% exceed progress targets and 80% meet expected targets
  • This will be evidenced using accelerated reader assessments and English written assessments
  • Clear programme of M&E in place
  • Thorough M&E of the impact of teaching over time – lesson observations, exercise book scrutinies, assessment file scrutinies
  • Regular analysis of student and class level data at whole school level
CTLs English January 17

 

April 17

 

July 17

Improved Year 7 Numeracy progress
  • Focused teaching and assessment that employs Purposeful Practice
  • Targeted intervention
  • CAT assessment and analysis
  • Students eligible for PP in Year 7 make at least as much progress by the end of the year as non-PP students so that at least 50% exceed progress targets and 80% meet expected targets
  • Clear programme of M&E in place
  • Thorough M&E of the impact of teaching over time – lesson observations, exercise book scrutinies, assessment file scrutinies
  • Regular analysis of student and class level data at whole school level
CTLs Mathematics January 17

 

April 17

 

July 17

Total budgeted cost SEE BELOW
A LITERACY AND NUMERACY SKILLS: YEARS 8 – 11
Desired outcome What will happen Success Criteria Implementation Staff lead Review
Improved Year 8-11 Literacy progress

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Focused teaching and assessment that employs Purposeful Practice
  • Targeted intervention
  • CAT assessment and NGRT assessment analysis
  • Students eligible for PP in Year 8 – 11 make at least as much progress by the end of the year as non-PP students given their starting points
  • Clear programme of M&E in place
  • Thorough M&E of the impact of teaching over time – lesson observations, exercise book scrutinies, assessment file scrutinies
  • Regular analysis of student and class level data at whole school level
CTLs English January 17

 

April 17

 

July 17

Improved Year 8-11 Numeracy progress
  • Focused teaching and assessment that employs Purposeful Practice
  • Targeted intervention
  • CAT assessment and analysis
  • Students eligible for PP in Year 7 make at least as much progress by the end of the year as non-PP students given their starting points
  • Clear programme of M&E in place
  • Thorough M&E of the impact of teaching over time – lesson observations, exercise book scrutinies, assessment file scrutinies
  • Regular analysis of student and class level data at whole school level
CTLs Mathematics January 17

 

April 17

 

July 17

Total budgeted cost £76 473
B FIXED TERM EXCLUSIONS AND USE OF INTERNAL REFERRAL UNIT
Desired outcome What will happen Success Criteria Implementation Staff lead Review
Reduction in on calls, fixed term exclusions/use of internal Referral Unit
  • Ongoing analysis of data
  • Identification of on call hotspots
  • 1:1 work with students with behaviours leading to on calls and time in RU
  • Support for staff in developing BfL strategies
  • Pastoral Managers working with students on developing positive behaviour strategies
  • Fewer PP students being on called
  • Fewer PP students using internal RU
  • Fewer PP students with fixed term exclusions
  • Clear programme of M&E in place
  • Thorough M&E of the impact on BfL of teaching over time
  • Regular analysis of student and class level data at whole school level
DHT/AHT pastoral Ongoing

Summer 2017

 Total budgeted cost £20 000
C ATTENDANCE
Desired outcome What will happen Success Criteria Implementation Staff lead Review
Improving attendance of PP students
  • Ongoing analysis of data
  • Identification of students at risk of becoming PA
  • 1:1 work with students and families with traits linked to PA
  • Pastoral Managers working with students on developing positive attendance strategies
  • Reduce the number of persistent absentees (PA) among students eligible for PP to below 10%.
  • Overall attendance among pupils eligible for PP improves from 91.5% in line with non-PP students.
  • Clear programme of M&E in place
  • Regular analysis of student data and early identification of trends
  • Immediate intervention in place for low attenders at variety of levels within school
  • Effective use of external agencies
  • Thorough M&E of the impact on BfL of teaching over time

 

DHT attendance

Ongoing

Summer 2017

Total budgeted cost £30 000

 

D OTHER APPROACHES
Desired outcome What will happen Success Criteria Implementation Staff lead Review
Improve attainment across the curriculum
  • Specific 1:1 and small group extra tuition support for targeted PP students
  • Curriculum support for PP students
  • Summer school for Year 6 – Year 7 PP students’ transition
  • Sundries
  • Improved progress for PP students
  • Improved attendance for PP students
  • Clear programme of M&E in place
  • Regular analysis of student data and early identification of trends
AHT intervention Ongoing

Summer 2017

Total budgeted cost £60 092

 

6. Review of expenditure
2015 – 2016 £207 013
LITERACY AND NUMERACY INTERVENTION
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)

Cost

£85 047

Improve attainment in Literacy and Numeracy and across the curriculum
  • Specific Literacy and Numeracy intervention across all year groups
  • Creating experience of non-PP students for PP students
  • Year 11 outcomes suggest that this strategy was a clear success
  • PP student outcomes were positive and led to a rapid narrowing of the gap with non-PP students nationally in spite of objectively low starting points in terms of KS2 APS and Cat scores
  • PP student outcomes in English and Mathematics in terms of expected progress levels and threshold performance at A*-C grades were much higher than PP students nationally
  • The vast majority of PP students’ Progress 8 scores are in line with Progress 8 scores for non PP students.
  • This is a strategy that will be developed further in 2016 – 2017
CURRICULUM CO-ORDINATION, ATTENDANCE AND PASTORAL SUPPORT
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)

Cost

£79 985

Increased curriculum engagement of more students
  • Increased number of individual timetables for specific PP students
  • 1:1 support for PP students
  • Focused intervention regarding PP student attendance
  • Year 11 outcomes suggest that this strategy was a clear success
  • PP student outcomes were positive and led to a rapid narrowing of the gap with non-PP students nationally in spite of objectively low starting points in terms of KS2 APS and Cat scores
  • The vast majority of PP students’ Progress 8 scores are in line with Progress 8 scores for non PP students.
  • Percentage Absence for Year 11 PP students dropped from 12.6% (2014/2015) to 11.8% (2015/2016)
  • This strategy will be developed further in 2016 – 2017
OTHER APPROACHES
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)

Cost

£41 981

Improve attainment across the curriculum
  • Specific 1:1 support for targeted PP students
  • Summer school for Year 6 – Year 7 PP students’ transition
  • Year 11 outcomes suggest that this strategy was a clear success
  • PP student outcomes were positive and led to a rapid narrowing of the gap with non-PP students nationally in spite of objectively low starting points in terms of KS2 APS and Cat scores
  • The vast majority of PP students’ Progress 8 scores are in line with Progress 8 scores for non PP students.
  • Year 7 feedback suggests transition was very effective
  • This strategy will be developed further in 2016 – 2017
 

 

7.    Additional detail
The Pupil Premium is finance given to schools with the specific aim of improving the outcomes of young people from less advantaged backgrounds. Nationally, there is a significant difference in the educational achievement of pupils who receive or have received Free School Meals than those who do not, for instance. The same is true of children who are in the care of Local Authorities.