Pupil Premium Statement

Pupil premium strategy statement (secondary)

1.    Summary information
School The Windsor Boys’ School
Academic Year 2016/17 Estimated PP budget £95,000 Date of most recent PP Review Sep 2016
Total number of pupils 813 Number of pupils eligible for PP 104 Date for next internal review of this strategy Sep 2017

 

2.  Current attainment
  Pupils eligible for PP (your school) Pupils eligible for PP (boys, national) Pupils not eligible for PP (national average)

Progress 8 Score English

 

0.29   0.08 (all pupils, nationally)
Progress 8 Score Maths 0.27   0.10 (all pupils, nationally)
Progress 8 Score average 0.08 -0.53 0.10 (all pupils, nationally)
3.  Barriers to future attainment (for pupils eligible for PP)
In-school barriers (issues to be addressed in school, such as poor literacy skills)
A.     Low levels of literacy.
B.     Low levels of numeracy.
C.     Low prior attainment.
D.     Challenging social, emotional and behavioural needs.
External barriers (issues which also require action outside school, such as low attendance rates)
D. Low attendance.
4.  Desired outcomes (desired outcomes and how they will be measured) Success criteria
A.     Increased attainment for disadvantaged pupils in English and maths.

Higher progress 8 scores for English and maths for disadvantaged pupils than 2015/16.

No gap between progress 8 scores in English and maths for disadvantaged pupils at TWBS and other pupils (boys) nationally.

B.     Increased attainment overall for disadvantaged pupils.

Higher overall progress 8 score than in 2015/16.

No gap between overall progress 8 for disadvantaged pupils at TWBS and other pupils (boys) nationally.

 

C.     Increased levels of attendance for disadvantaged pupils.

Higher % attendance for disadvantaged pupils than in 2015/6.

Lower % of persistent absentees who are disadvantaged than in 2015/16.

Overall rates of attendance and persistent absenteeism for disadvantaged pupils in line with other TWBS pupils.

D.     Improved behaviour for learning and engagement with school.

Reduction in the % of disadvantaged pupils in 2015/16 who receive 1 or more fixed term exclusions.

Reduction in the % of disadvantaged pupils in 2015/16 who receive 1 or more internal isolation.

Overall attitude to learning scores for disadvantaged pupils in line with other TWBS pupils.

 

 

5.  Planned expenditure
·         Academic year 2016/17
The three headings below enable schools to demonstrate how they are using the Pupil Premium to improve classroom pedagogy, provide targeted support and support whole school strategies.
    i.   Quality of teaching for all
Desired outcome Chosen action / approach What is the evidence and rationale for this choice? How will you ensure it is implemented well? Staff lead When will you review implementation?
Progress in maths and English for disadvantaged pupils in line with national average for other pupils Employment of leading teachers in English and maths to co-ordinate strategies and track progress in department. Since creation of these posts, gaps have closed. Much work has been done by lead practitioners on marking and feedback (across the school) as this is identified by the Education Endowment Foundation as having high impact.

Regular review of pupil progress through progress review cycle.

Meetings between faculties to share approaches to disadvantaged students with close monitoring of strategies and impact.

KL

DS

Throughout the year in line with the progress review cycle.

Pastoral team targeted to monitor outcomes of disadvantaged pupils.

 

Progress 8 score for disadvantaged pupils in line with other pupils nationally. Appointment of senior leader with overall responsibility for co-ordinating a range of strategies that will improve the progress of disadvantaged pupils. Since creation of this post in 2014, gaps between disadvantaged pupils at TWBS and other pupils nationally have narrowed (although not closed completely yet). Having a lead focus will enable all key staff to be informed about disadvantaged students with senior leader having responsibility for gap closure. Senior Leader will oversee meetings between faculties and pastoral team to ensure progress of disadvantaged students is monitored and impact is measured. RC This will be a KPI throughout the year but monitored alongside progress review cycles. Regular meetings set up to monitor subject areas and response to data an agenda item in SLT meetings moving forwards.
Total budgeted cost £33,000
   ii.   Targeted support
Desired outcome Chosen action / approach What is the evidence and rationale for this choice? How will you ensure it is implemented well? Staff lead When will you review implementation?
Progress in maths and English for disadvantaged pupils in line with national average for other pupils Small group teaching based on identification of those who need intervention. EEF toolkit – small group tuition. Monitoring of progress of targeted pupils; formally through progress review cycle and informally through meetings with lead TA. TA Throughout the year in line with the progress review cycle. Students will then be selected/deselected based on need and results of intervention.
Accelerated progress in literacy.

Creation of non-language class.

1 to 1 literacy support.

EEF toolkit – reading strategies.

Regular review of pupil progress through progress review cycle.

Reading ages tested at the beginning of the process and again throughout.

GH Non language class will be set up within first weeks of year. Monitored throughout the progress review cycles and the class differentiated based on individual need.
Total budgeted cost £8,500
 iii.   Other approaches
Desired outcome Chosen action / approach What is the evidence and rationale for this choice? How will you ensure it is implemented well? Staff lead When will you review implementation?
Increased attendance and well-being of disadvantaged pupils.

1 to 1 support of learning mentor.

Monitoring of attendance of disadvantaged pupils and intervention where necessary by attendance officer.

EEF toolkit – social and emotional learning.

Through weekly pastoral panel meetings.

Analysis of attendance and persistent absenteeism data.

LM

 

LS

Pastoral panel minutes are released weekly and will identify the students who have attendance issues. Attendance reports to be reported half termly.
Improved behaviour and engagement with school. 1 to 1 and small group support from interventions manager. Education Endowment Foundation Toolkit.

Through weekly pastoral panel meetings.

Analysis of attitude to learning and progress/attainment data.

Through weekly pastoral panel meetings.

KS The weekly panel meetings involve a number of different stakeholders. The issues are then dealt with by the appropriate team. The progress review cycle will demonstrate improvements in affected students and be monitored by staff lead.
Provide opportunity for independent study.

Subscription to SAM Learning

Access to Pixl Maths App, Pixl English App, and a number of subject specific resources.

EEF toolkit – homework and independent learning.

Monitoring of engagement with SAM learning through online reports.

Students/Parents will be given list of resources and the interaction of these is trackable via internal data. Response and engagement will be overseen by senior leader.

RC As each of the resources is launched and implemented the senior lead will review the usage statistics and meet with the disadvantaged students to promote usage.
Total budgeted cost £45,000

 

6.  Review of expenditure
Previous Academic Year 2015/16
    i.   Quality of teaching for all
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
Progress in maths and English for disadvantaged pupils in line with national average for other pupils Employment of leading teachers in English and maths to co-ordinate strategies and track progress in department.

Average progress 8 for non-disadvantaged pupils nationally in English is 0.08 compared with school disadvantaged pupil score of 0.29.

Average progress 8 for non-disadvantaged pupils nationally in maths is 0.10 compared with school disadvantaged score of 0.27.

This has been a successful strategy overall and we will definitely continue with it.

Focus needed on disadvantaged pupils in English and maths with middle prior attainment at Key Stage 2 as this was the starting point where a gap remains. Close analysis needed of why this happened.

£18,056
Progress 8 score for disadvantaged pupils in line with other pupils nationally. Appointment of senior leader with overall responsibility for co-ordinating a range of strategies that will improve the progress of disadvantaged pupils. School overall progress 8 score for disadvantaged pupils is -0.08. Average progress 8 for disadvantaged boys nationally is -0.53. Average progress 8 for non-disadvantaged boys is -0.03.

This has been a successful strategy overall and we will definitely continue with it.

Progress 8 score in the open bucket is below 0. In the English, maths and Ebacc buckets it is above 0 so progress in bucket 3 subjects needs careful monitoring moving forwards. Option choices will be monitored and curriculum pathways investigated to maximise the progress of disadvantaged students.

 

£16,948
   ii.   Targeted 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
Accelerated progress in literacy.

Creation of non-language class.

1 to 1 literacy support.

The gap between chronological age and reading age closed. We will continue with this approach via a separate literacy focus group. This will be given curriculum time with extra sessions targeting the students with the highest need. £5,591
Progress in maths and English for disadvantaged pupils in line with national average for other pupils Small group teaching based on identification of those who need intervention.

Average progress 8 for non-disadvantaged pupils nationally in English is 0.08 compared with school disadvantaged pupil score of 0.29.

Average progress 8 for non-disadvantaged pupils nationally in maths is 0.10 compared with school disadvantaged score of 0.27.

We will continue to use this strategy. Lead practitioners in both subjects are responsible for identifying students who need intervention. This will be trackable and results discussed in faculty wide meetings. Use of the older 6th form students to help teach and monitor is being used. £2,614
 iii.   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
Increased attendance and well-being of disadvantaged pupils.

1 to 1 support of learning mentor.

Monitoring of attendance of disadvantaged pupils and intervention where necessary by attendance officer.

ELSA training and support provided by TA.

Only 1 disadvantaged pupil didn’t sit a full suite of GCSE exams; focusing on English and maths.

Persistent absence of disadvantaged pupils was 19.3% compared with 10.13% of all pupils.

 

 

 

 

 

 

We will continue to use this strategy. Identification of the specific support and involvement of external agencies could be highlighted more clearly on the pastoral panel minutes.

An attendance officer was employed to monitor the disadvantaged pupils. This has continued. Where issues arise, a wider pastoral group is tasked with investigating the situation and ensuring the pupils needs and well-being are being looked after.

£31,275
Improved behaviour and engagement with school.

1 to 1 and small group support from interventions manager.

Pivotal training programme for all staff.

Alternative provision and educational psychology service fee.

No permanent exclusions.

Reduction in the number of fixed term exclusions for disadvantaged pupils.

Pivotal was useful to an extent and some aspects of this have been continued in house. The number of permanent exclusions fell. Interventions manager ensured that disadvantaged students were on track in coursework and behaved in lessons so that work could be complete and progress made.

£15,667

 

 

£3,302

 

£761

Improve opportunities for independent learning. Subscription to SAM learning.

34% of year 11 disadvantaged pupils engaged extensively.

45% of year 11 disadvantaged pupils engaged less extensively.

21% of year 11 disadvantaged pupils didn’t engage with SAMlearning at all.

 

Excellent benefits with year 11 disadvantaged pupils in the run up to exams but usage much lower earlier in the year and also by other year groups so need to review this.

Also need to create an action plan to engage reluctant pupils.

£2,470
Disadvantage student increased attitude to learning Focus 5 competition

40 students in year 11 chosen to compete in houses. Competition within boys a proven improvement.

8 week competition to increase attitude to learning and progress in subject areas.

17 disadvantaged students performed better than the 23 non disadvantaged students.

The students enjoy the competition and take part with enthusiasm. Subject teachers and tutors are engaged and provides focus for all students in addition to teaching.

We will continue this strategy but provide further focus on the subject areas most required rather than all subject areas.

£0

 

 

7.    Additional detail

Summary of analysis of 2016 exam results for disadvantaged pupils:

 

Table 1 shows data from the 2016 exam outcomes for disadvantaged pupils at TWBS and compares their achievement and progress with the achievement of other pupils (i.e. not disadvantaged) nationally (2015 data used for this as 2016 national not available yet).

Disadvantaged Pupils TWBS

National Other (2015)

(both genders)

Key Stage 2 Average Point Score

25

(mid 4C average)

                     Level 4C
% achieving 5 A*-C with English and Maths 32 31
% making expected progress in English 77 69
% exceeding expected progress in English 47 30
% making expected progress in Maths 53 66
% exceeding expected progress in Maths 23 30

 

Table 1

Table 2 shows some three year trends.

Measure 2016 2015 2014
Value added ‘score’ for disadvantaged pupils 998 988 952
Gap between value added score for disadvantaged and other pupils (all TWBS) -13 -29 -52
Average Capped 8 points score for disadvantaged pupils 288 277 237
Progress 8 score for disadvantaged pupils 0.08 -0.16 NA
Gap between Progress 8 score for disadvantaged pupils and other pupils -0.02 -0.49 NA