Worcestershire Pupil Premium Conference Evaluating the impact of schools’ use of the pupil premium Sandra Hayes HMI January 2015

The pupil premium: an update July 2014 Based on evidence from:  151 inspections carried out between January and December 2013  text review of 1,600 school inspection reports published between September 2013 and March 2014  national performance data for premium-an-update premium-an-update

The pupil premium: an update July 2014  Pupil premium is making a difference in many schools  Overall, pupil premium is being spent more effectively  More effective tracking of progress of eligible pupils  Leaders, including governors paying more attention to the needs of this group of pupils  Interventions targeted more forensically  Governors more aware of role in monitoring use of pupil premium funding.

The pupil premium: an update July 2014 The 151 inspection reports: school overall effectiveness / impact of pupil premium Inspectors found an association between the overall effectiveness of the school and the impact of the pupil premium. Schools judged good/outstanding  Gaps in attainment for pupils eligible for free school meals were closing in all 86 of the schools judged to be good or outstanding for overall effectiveness. Gaps were closing rapidly in around a fifth of these schools.  In 12 schools, there was virtually no difference between the attainment of eligible and non-eligible pupils; most of these schools were judged to be outstanding.

The pupil premium: an update July 2014 In a small proportion of the good schools, typically those whose overall effectiveness had improved since their previous inspection, gaps in attainment were closing more slowly. The inspection reports for these schools commonly include a recommendation for further improvement that relates, at least in part, to those pupils eligible for the pupil premium funding.

The pupil premium: an update July 2014 The 151 inspection reports: school overall effectiveness / impact of pupil premium Schools judged to require improvement  Gaps in attainment were also closing in around two thirds of the 50 schools that had been judged as requires improvement.  However, the rate of improvement in these schools was often inconsistent across different year groups.  In some cases, there had been more discernible recent increases in achievement after a period of stubborn poor performance.  Often, this recent improvement was linked to changes at senior leadership level or in governance arrangements and the impact that these new leaders have on ensuring that the funding is used more effectively.

The pupil premium: an update July 2014 The 151 inspection reports: school overall effectiveness / impact of pupil premium Schools judged to be inadequate  In general, pupils eligible for the pupil premium were making poor progress in the 15 schools that were inadequate for overall effectiveness.  Attainment gaps were typically wider than average or closing too slowly.  However, in a few of these schools, the performance of pupils eligible for free school meals, although still too low, was better than their peers.

The pupil premium: an update July 2014 Schools that are spending their pupil premium funding more effectively  are committed to ‘closing the gap’ and that have robust tracking systems are showing most improvement  set a clear vision and high expectations – no excuses  respond to a wide range of specific needs – what about disadvantaged pupils who don’t need to ‘catch up’?  have governors who are very actively involved in holding leaders to account for the achievement of pupils eligible for the pupil premium

The pupil premium: an update July 2014 The most common criticism in inspection reports That the impact of spending was not being evaluated effectively by leaders and governors. Other examples of poor leadership and management include not ensuring that the funding is spent on the specific pupils for whom it is intended or having an underspend.

External reviews of a school’s use of the pupil premium  Since September 2013, inspectors have been able to recommend an external review of the school’s use of the pupil premium funding where the inspection identifies specific issues regarding the provision for eligible pupils.  Even where leadership and management are judged to be good, inspectors may use their professional judgement to determine whether a recommendation for an external review of the school’s use of the pupil premium would benefit the school.  Ofsted will report on the effectiveness of external reviews of the pupil premium in bringing about improvement later in 2015.

The Worcestershire context PrimarySecondary % schools good or better % pupils in good or better schools % schools good or better % students in good or better schools ENGLAND82%79%72%75% WEST MIDLANDS80%77%70%74% Worcestershire89% 86% Sandwell85% 53%52% Solihull84%83%79%80% Herefordshire82%85%87%91% Telford and Wrekin79%81%86%89% Birmingham77%79% 80% Staffordshire77%74%69% Shropshire77%80%70%74% Dudley75%77%45%52% Warwickshire74% 71%75% Stoke-on-Trent72%71%46%44% Coventry69%70%84%88% Walsall63%64%65%66% Wolverhampton59% 69%72%

KS2 FSM / non-FSM 2012

KS2 FSM / non-FSM 2013

KS4 FSM / non-FSM 2012

KS4 FSM / non-FSM 2013

And 2014?

Free school meals pupils in Worcestershire  There are currently 5,026 eligible primary-aged pupils in Worcestershire schools. If things remain as they are, around 2,500 of these will not achieve level 4+ in RWM at the end of Year 6.  There are currently 3,592 eligible secondary- aged students. If things remain as they are, fewer than 900 of these will attain 5A*-C (including English and mathematics)  And that doesn’t include looked after children……

How can school leaders demonstrate impact?

RAISEonline The obvious…  How well did disadvantaged pupils attain last year in comparison with other pupils in the school and nationally?  How much progress did disadvantaged pupils make last year compared with other pupils in the school and against the national picture?  How well have disadvantaged pupils been performing over time? Is attainment rising? Is the attainment gap narrowing? But what about…  Attendance and exclusions for different groups of pupils?  Is there a link between high rates of absence and low achievement ?

Pupil Premium statement on website Needs to include IMPACT, not just quoting what disadvantaged pupils attained. This is your chance to start demonstrating impact before the inspection What difference did the use of the pupil premium make? How much did gaps close?

Communicating impact  Is absolutely everyone on board with the ‘no excuses’ culture? How do you know? What about governors?  If there is a designated leader for the use of the pupil premium, do they have sufficient seniority to make a difference?  How can you demonstrate the school does not confuse eligibility for the Pupil Premium with low ability?  Can all teachers demonstrate they know which pupils are eligible and that they take responsibility for the impact of the pupils premium?  Can governors demonstrate they are thoroughly involved in the decision making and evaluation process.  Can you prove that interventions are not compensating for less than good teaching?  How frequently and effectively are you analysing achievement data to check whether progress was being made and whether any interventions were working… … and then making adjustments?

Tracking impact of pupil premium  Can you demonstrate the proportions of disadvantaged pupils making or exceeding expected progress in different subjects?  How does this compare to non-disadvantaged pupils:  In-school?  Nationally?  What do gaps in attainment and rates of progress for disadvantaged/non-disadvantaged pupils tell you about whether gaps are closing quickly enough?  What about disadvantaged children in the EYFS / students in the sixth form?  What about the impact of pupil premium on more able disadvantaged pupils?  How effectively does use of the pupil premium tackle discrimination and foster good relations?

What NOT to do ….  ‘My school is in an area of high deprivation, so we have a lot of disadvantaged children– but how can we raise attainment when there are so many?’  ‘Parents don’t support at home so its hard to make a difference’  ‘But their attendance is so low…….’  ‘We only have a very small group of disadvantaged pupils in my school, so it’s not an issue for us.’  ‘Our disadvantaged pupils are at age related expectations so its not a problem’  ‘It’s not just that they’re entitled to free school meals, but they have so many other needs, not to mention the difficulties that the children in care have.’

How can you demonstrate you are NOT…  … spending the funding indiscriminately on teaching assistants with little impact and not managing their performance well?  … spending the funding on one-to-one tuition and booster classes – that go on forever…and do not relate to class teaching…and are not audited or quality assured?  …planning spending in isolation – not part of the school action plan?  … assuming that pupils eligible for the pupil premium will have learning difficulties?  … comparing the performance of pupils eligible for the pupil premium with other eligible pupils nationally, rather than all pupils – lowering expectations?  … permitting an excuses culture to persist.

Guiding principles - summary  Clear leadership – including governors  All staff involved and aware  Analytical approach alongside challenging success criteria  Clear plan of support  Quality of teaching – including marking and feedback  Regular tracking and comparison  IMPACT - monitoring, reviewing, evaluating  …and changing what you do if it is not working.

Best Practice – Senior leaders  frequent tracking, analysis and evaluation  focus on attendance  hold all staff to account for results  dedicate a (sufficiently senior) member of staff to be responsible  make sure that the school is inclusive of people (parents and students) who do not have as much money as others  report on website – show IMPACT  intervene early – take a long-term view.  find out what it is that is holding these pupils back and address barriers

Best Practice - Middle leaders  track progress of FSM/CLA as discrete groups and hold members of teams to account  ensure that teaching is improving achievement for all pupils  ensure that FSM/CLA have a stake in the school, that they and their parents feel that the school serves their needs as much as others  encourage imaginative ways of ensuring that interventions can happen  find out from pupils what they need  hold the line on the no excuses philosophy.

Best Practice - Teachers  plan and deliver lessons that meet the needs/interests of all pupils in the class  mark work and give meaningful feedback with follow-up  know who is vulnerable in the class, spend time with them  track frequently  remove barriers  talk to parents  endorse high aspirations – no excuses.

Best Practice - Governors  ask for information about how many pupils are eligible  look at the breakdown of funding allocation and provision  ask what is being done  ask why  ask for information about impact of actions  ask why it is working and why it isn’t