ARCHIVE – Pupil Premium & Literacy/Numeracy Catch up

Click here for the Pupil Premium Funding Report 2017 – 2018

The Government believes that the Pupil Premium, which is additional to main school funding, is the best way to address the current underlying inequalities between children eligible for free school meals (FSM) and their wealthier peers by ensuring that funding to tackle disadvantage reaches the students who need it most.

In most cases the Pupil Premium is allocated to schools and is clearly identifiable. Schools are free to spend the Pupil Premium as they see fit. However, we are accountable as to how the funding has been used to support students and low income families.

Funding Allocation for 2015/2016

Pupil premium received Number on roll 128

Eligible for PPG 68

Amount received per pupil £935

Amount received for PPG £57,035

Amount received PPG + £13,300

Amount received for service pupils £300

Total amount for 2015/16 £70,635

Nature of support Expenditure

Literacy support manager – An M-grade TA with specialist literacy training and targeted intervention time (half timetable)

Pastoral support manager – An M-grade TA off timetable to support emotional needs, and lead SEAL interventions

Behaviour support manager  - An M-grade TA off timetable to lead behaviour interventions

SEAL sessions – 17 PPG pupils

Subsidised residential trips – 15 PPG pupils; 1 pupil had extra trip paid in full

After school club support/ transport – 34 PPG pupils; 6 PPG pupils had free taxi Transition support 2 PPG pupils

Curriculum focus iPADS for use in year 7 numeracy – 14 PPG pupils

Free literacy and numeracy after school clubs – 7 PPG pupils

Distar literacy interventions – 39 PPG pupils

Targeted support from pastoral manager – 15 PPG pupils

Life books for use in SEAL – 17 PPG pupils

iPAD for use at home – 1 PPG pupil

Laptops to keep and use in school for extended writing (5 bought) – 2 PPG pupils

Literacy and numeracy catch up funding 2015-2016

Year 7 Literacy and Numeracy catch up funding

2015-2016 Crowdys Hill school received:  £11,000

Literacy Catch Up

Employing a teaching assistant for specific individualised literacy interventions   £9,750

Numeracy Catch Up

Numeracy interventions, targeted for individuals weekly     £390

Homework booklets for use with year 7 and 8              £780

Literacy and Numeracy catch up funding 2014-2015

Year 7 Literacy and Numeracy catch up funding

2014-2015   Crowdys Hill school received:   £11,000

 

Numeracy Catch Up

Catch up text books for use with year 7 and 8 £3400

Year 7 numeracy catch up books £128.65

Year 7 rapid maths homework books £65

20 IPADS for use in maths lessons plus maths apps  £6000

Impact data on separate page, on website.

Impact actions

ACTION

The use of Ipads has improved the engagement of students in class, and this is shown by the year 7 data for this school year, and last school year. Extend the use of Ipads for year 8 classes

Focus on the year 7 students that enter at 1C or below, and target interventions, such as Numicon, and problem-solving to reduce the gap.

Focus on year 8 students, for 2015-2016, in particular their Using and Applying ability, and homework booklets

Reasons for choosing these interventions: Advice and research from

Literacy and numeracy catch-up strategies   November 2012,  DfE.

Literacy interventions in secondary schools

• Secondary school age pupils’ literacy problems can be effectively targeted by direct, explicit and systematic fluency, vocabulary and comprehension instruction in one-to-one (Houge et al., 2008);  Although one-to-one literacy programmes for this age group have not been widely employed, three key features of successful programmes have been identified: monitoring and evaluation of the quality of construction; planning and structuring of the tutoring session; and tutor training (Houge et al., 2008);

• Fluency is a critical element for many older pupils with reading difficulties, since it is necessary for comprehension; however, it can be hard to influence through intervention. Nevertheless, evaluations of fluency interventions have reported moderate to large effect sizes on speed of reading (although improved comprehension did not always result from improved fluency) (Wexler et al., 2007);

• Vocabulary as well as fluency deficits are hard to remediate in older readers: interventions focusing on these elements of reading may also need to encourage pupils to increase the amount and range of their personal reading support their development (Tunmer, 2008);

For these reasons we chose to use Toe-by-toe for targeted interventions

• Brooks (2007) noted that there is much less evidence on reading interventions at secondary level, and none on writing interventions. He also identified a range of effective reading interventions used in secondary schools in the UK, concluding that this represents evidence of “useful to remarkable effectiveness” for some schemes; and,  Slavin et al. (2008) conducted a systematic review of methods of improving reading in middle and high school pupils (11-18 year olds) in the US. They concluded that programmes designed to change daily teaching practices and which had cooperative learning at their core were the most effective.

The English department are currently revising their reading schemes and reading sessions

Literacy interventions: Findings from research

Brooks (2007) concluded overall that:

• Large-scale schemes, though expensive, can give good value for money;

• Where reading partners are available and can be given appropriate training and support, partnership approaches can be very effective;

• Success with some pupils with the most severe problems is elusive, and this reinforces the need for skilled, intensive, one-to-one intervention for these pupils;

We are targeting pupils with Toe-by-toe programme for at least two terms

• Interventions longer than one term may produce proportionally further benefits but the gains need to be carefully monitored

Numeracy Interventions

Slavin et al. (2009) found that the most successful mathematics programmes focused on changing daily teaching practices, particularly the use of cooperative learning methods, classroom management, and motivation programmes. The most successful mathematics programmes encouraged pupil interaction.

Numeracy interventions in primary schools

• The evidence base on numeracy intervention is patchy, and less developed than the evidence base on literacy interventions, in particular in terms of comparing levels of improvement between different mathematics intervention schemes Dowker (2009);

• Interventions can be more effective if introduced at an early stage: this can help to reduce ‘mathematics anxiety’ (Dowker, 2004, 2009);  We identify pupils in September, whom we feel may be anxious about maths, and focus on ensuring enjoyment and engagement in lessons

• Low attainers in mathematics benefit from detailed assessment of their learning needs, and interventions work best when they are targeted on an individual child’s weakness (Dowker, 2004);  Maths teachers pass on pupil details to the interventions lead, and suggest areas of focus

• As with literacy, cooperative learning, paired work and group collaboration have been found to have positive effects for low attainers (Slavin and Lake, 2008; Dowker, 2004); and,

• Numbers Count in the UK clearly has a short-term impact on individual pupils, however, it is relatively expensive, and Torgerson et al.’s (2011) evaluation was unable to derive strong conclusions of the medium-term impact of ECC and NC on pupils and schools, although it was considered to be well designed and received strong support from participating schools. This was looked into by the maths department and felt that it was too prescriptive for our pupils at year 7, it may be more useful for our current year 9 pupils.

Numeracy interventions in secondary schools

• There is little evidence on numeracy interventions for secondary school pupils; and, a US study found that pupils using ‘standards-based mathematics programmes’ in elementary and middle schools significantly outperformed their matched peers from schools using a mix of traditional programmes and curricular (Riordan and Noyce, 2001). We have found that a mixture of strategies have worked with our pupils. Our curriculum has an emphasis on problem-solving and mental maths.

Generic strategies which are beneficial for low attainers

• Early intervention; monitoring of pupils’ progress; tailoring teaching to the appropriate needs of individual pupils; coaching teachers/teaching assistants in specific teaching strategies such as cooperative learning; cognitive approaches, based on mental processes; one-to-one tuition; peer-to-peer support; aspects of the home-school relationship; and study support.

Numeracy interventions: findings from research

The quality of teaching assistants’ interventions for pupils with mathematical difficulty is positively impacted by training;  We have a trained maths specialist TA who leads maths interventions.

• Peer tuition and group collaboration approaches (e.g. older pupils teaching younger pupils; more able classmates teaching less able classmates; collaborative learning between pupils of similar abilities) can be effective, but are unlikely to be a complete substitute for adult intervention, particularly for those with more severe needs;

• Training in formal operations (the manipulation of symbols and abstractions) can positively impact on the mathematical development of older children and adolescents;

• Training in metacognitive skills has been shown to be effective in some cases, but more research is needed on exactly which aspects of metacognition are important;

Slavin et al. (2009) identified 13 studies of primary mathematics curricula and 40 of secondary mathematics curricula. The curricula included:

• Innovative strategies focusing on problem solving, alternative solutions and conceptual understanding;

• Traditional commercial textbooks; and,

• Back-to-basics textbook emphasising a step-by-step approach.

Overall, they found no evidence to recommend one type of curriculum over another.

Our maths curriculum focuses on problem-solving throughout year 7 onwards. We used funds from last year’s catch up to buy in new text books for maths which are progressive, and have a focus on puzzles and word problems.

For 2015-2016:

Schools will receive £500 for each pupil in year 7 who did not achieve at least level 4 in reading or maths at the end of KS2.

For the year 2013/14 our Pupil Premium income was £48,600

For the year 2013/14 our Pupil Premium plus income was £0

Click here to view our Summary of Pupil Premium Plus 2015/16

Click here to view our Targeting Pupil Premium Recipients 2015/16

Click to view our Pupil Premium Expenditure Autumn Term 2015/16

Click here to view our Pupil Premium 2015/16 Breakdown

Click here to view Pupil Premium English Breakdown 2015

Click here to view Pupil Premium Maths Breakdown 2015

Click here to view Impact data for Year 7 and 8 Students in Mathematics

 Please find below for Pupil Premium Data for 2014-2015