ORMISTON SANDWELL COMMUNITY

ACADEMY Pupil Premium Review – 29th January 2015

Anonymised version for website

1

Pupil Premium Review

Annex 1: Planning and Preparation Template

Ormiston Sandwell Community Academy – Pupil Premium Profile (2015)

Total Number of pupils in the school 905

Number of PP eligible pupils: 377 > 41.1%

Amount per pupil: £935

Total Pupil Premium budget: See below

PUPIL PREMIUM 2013/14 PUPIL PREMIUM 2014/15

Total Number of pupils on roll 847 Total Number of pupils on roll 918

Number of PP students 341 Number of PP students 377

PP % of pupils on roll 40.3% PP % of pupils on roll 41.1%

Allocation per student £900 Allocation per student 935 / 1500

(LAC)

Total Budget £317,273 Total Budget £352,495

Planned Allocation Planned Allocation

1. Staffing 1. Staffing

Academic Mentors £37,590 Academic Mentors £66,342

Additional staffing to reduce class sizes £89,047

Additional staffing to reduce class sizes £95,906

AHOH - 50% £65,669 AHOH - 50% £66,326

Learning mentors - 50% £33,879 Learning mentors - 50% £34,218

Study Support staff costs £11,476 Study Support staff costs £12,000

2. ICT Resources 2. ICT Resources

Laptops for PP students Laptops for PP students £2,000

Ipads for inclass support Ipads for inclass support £3,555

2

3. General Resources 3. General Resources

Revision Guides £5,291 Revision Guides £5,500

Uniform, meal and travel assistance £3,551 Uniform, meal and travel assistance £4,000

PP Admin £3,200

Access to the curriculum £2,670 Access to the curriculum £5,000

4. Curriculum Enhancement 4. Curriculum Enhancement

Residentials £3,490 Residentials £4,000

Trips £18,573 Trips £20,000

Brilliant Club £4,160 Brilliant Club £8,500

Private Tutoring £1,350 Private Tutoring £1,500

Breakfast Club £77 Breakfast Club £5,000

Reading Initiative £1,655 Reading Initiative £2,000

Exam Buster £1,523 Exam Buster £2,000

EAL Training EAL Training £1,000

Attendance Support Attendance Support £24,000

Total Allocated £280,001 Total Allocated £366,046

The impact of the expenditure of the ‘Disadvantaged’ budget is outlined page 6 onwards.

3

Evidence of school performance

Key statements from Ofsted report(s) relating to the performance of disadvantaged pupils:

25/6/13 – HMI Monitoring visit (Section 8) ‘Leaders set challenging targets for students’ achievement and there is now better tracking of the progress of disadvantaged students and those with special educational needs’. Ofsted School Inspection Report: 30 April - 1 May 2013

A higher than average proportion of students is known to be eligible for free school meals.

Students known to be eligible for free school meals achieve about one grade less in

mathematics and three quarters of a grade less in English than other students, but this gap has narrowed and this narrowing continues.

Senior leaders have allocated the pupil premium funding well to support students who are

at risk of disadvantage. This funds targeted interventions, extra catch-up sessions and smaller classes. The funding ensures that all students can access enrichment activities. Gaps in attainment between groups of students have reduced between 2011 and 2012, and more recent monitoring suggests that these gaps are continuing to close.

Senior leaders monitor data to identify students who are falling behind and provide

additional support. This works well to identify students at risk of not obtaining GCSE passes at grade C. The system is not identifying enough students of high ability who could achieve better than expected progress, nor has the progress of disabled students and those with special educational needs been tracked rigorously enough.

4

Closing the Gap – 2104 RAISE

5

This table highlights the difference the ‘First Entry Rule’

would have had on our 2013 results e.g.

First Entry 5EM = 31%

Best Entry 5EM = 50% (OSCA record + predecessor school

record)

Historically PP students in particular, have

benefited from multiple entries in order to secure their

target grades.

6

Summary of school’s current performance data:

Current Y11 (2014/15)

Current Y11 (Expected progress 3LP)

English

PP v Non PP Gap = 7% (National gap

16% -2014)

Maths

PP v Non PP Gap = 16% (National gap

23% -2104)

Closing the Gap Y11 Maths DC2

3LP > 16%

4LP > 14%

Note

Our analysis of the APS of PP

and Non-PP indicate the Y7

students arrive with an

attainment gap.

See evidence below for Y9 gap.

7

Closing the Gap Y11 English

DC2 (9/1/15)

3LP > 7%

4LP > 9%

Analysis of Y11 cohort by

Key Stage 2 data

demonstrates a significant

gap PP v Non PP and male v

female.

8

Y10

Closing the Gap Y10 English

DC2

3LP > 2%

4LP > PP students are doing

3% better than Non-PP

Closing the Gap Y10 Maths DC2

3LP > 4%

4LP > PP students are doing 5%

better than Non-PP students

9

As with Y11 a significant

Y10 gap exists between

Pupil Premium and Non

Premium students

based on KS2 national

tests data.

10

Y9

Closing the Gap Y9 Maths DC2

Expected Progress > no PP v

Non PP gap

Exceeding Progress > PP v Non

PP 6% gap

Closing the Gap Y9 English DC2

Expected Progress >5% gap

11

An analysis of Y9 APS on entry

PP v Non PP Gap present on

entry and a lesser gap for male

v female based on Key Stage 2

test scores.

12

Y12/13

Data Capture December 2014

Year 13

2014 results DC2 Disadvantaged

(13) Other (10) KS5 Floor

Standards Academic: APS

per entry 163 201 172

(100% above

this)

Academic: APS

per student 499 371

Academic: 1+

A*-E 78 100 100 100

Academic: 2+

A*-E 33 0 0 0

Academic: 3+

A*-E 22 0 0 0

Average Grade C-

Vocational: APS

per entry 213.6 212 194

(75% above

this)

Vocational: APS

per student 499 455

Vocational: 1+

A*-E 78 100 100% 100%

Vocational: 2+

A*-E 33 67 82% 50%

Vocational: 3+

A*-E 22 14 18% 10%

Average Grade Distinction -

School APS per

entry 210

School APS per

student 438

School 3+ A*-E

Rate 18% 25% 10%

School 2+ A*-E

Rate 91% 92% 90%

School 1+ A*-E

Rate 100% 100% 100%

A*-C rate 68% 61% 75%

A*-E rate 100% 100% 100%

No gap between disadvantaged

and non-disadvantaged

Disadvantaged out performing

their non-disadvantaged peers

13

Year 12

2014 results DC2 Disadvant

aged (7)

Other (29)

Academic: APS per

entry 163 104

Academic: APS per

student 499 296

Academic: 1+ A*-E 78 100% 100% 100% Academic: 2+ A*-E 33 29% 67% 22% Academic: 3+ A*-E 22 0 0 0 Average Grade C Vocational: APS per

entry 213.6 225

Vocational: APS per

student 499 497

Vocational: 1+ A*-E 78 100% 100% 100% Vocational: 2+ A*-E 33 62% 40% 67% Vocational: 3+ A*-E 22 24% 0% 29% Average Grade Distinction School APS per entry 111 School APS per

student 441

School 3+ A*-E Rate 50% 33% 54% School 2+ A*-E Rate 82% 67% 86% School 1+ A*-E Rate 100% 100% 100% A*-A rate 20% 17% 20% A*-B rate 25% 26% 17% A*-C rate 68% 70% 58% A*-E rate 100% 100% 100%

Slightly more mixed picture in

Y12 with disadvantaged

performing well against non-

disadvantaged in some measures

and less so in others.

Post 16 tracking progress and

interventions applied to tackle

issues

14

School’s pupil premium statement (website version):

2014 – 2015 Pupil Premium: Funding Allocation

What is Pupil Premium?

The Pupil Premium (funding) was introduced in April 2011. Schools were allocated funding for children from low income families who were eligible for Free School Meals and also for children who have been looked after for more than six months.

From April 2012, the Pupil Premium was extended to include children who had been eligible for Free School Meals at any point in the last six years and those families with parents in the Armed Forces. The aim is to help raise achievement and improve outcomes for these pupils.

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 and their peers by ensuring that funding to tackle disadvantage reaches the pupils who need it most.

At OSCA, just under 42% of our students are eligible for the Pupil Premium or are considered disadvantaged. This significant proportion means that whilst we have initially directed our Pupil Premium Funding provision at potentially needy and vulnerable students in general, we are aware that this has also had a spin off for all of our students.

How much Pupil Premium did we receive?

The funding is paid based on financial years which run from 1st April to 31st March the following year. During the 2011/12 financial year, OSCA received £488 for each student in Years 7 to 11 who were entitled to Free School Meals. During 2012/13, the funding has increased to £623 per pupil who were entitled to Free School Meals or have been at some point in the last six years. A small additional amount of funding is received for any looked after children at the academy. During 13/14, the funding has increased to £900 per qualifying student. This has risen again to £935 per pupil for 2014/15.

This equates to the totals below:

Financial year 2011/12 - £91,256 Financial year 2012/13 - £197,868 Financial year 2013/14 - £306,900 Financial year 2014/15 - £316,952

15

How have we used our Pupil Premium Funding Allocation?

Examples of how we have used our Pupil Premium funding to raise achievement are as follows:

Provision of curriculum support and targeted intervention in the core subjects of English, Mathematics and Science through in class support or small group withdrawals from qualified teachers for individual pupils making below expected progress. Three academic mentors have been recruited to facilitate this during the 2013/14 academic year.

Pupils have also had opportunities for additional support and intervention through our pre examination Friday afternoon/Saturday Mathematics and English revision club. This support is provided by qualified specialist teachers.

Subsidised educational visits

SEN staff time to work with target students

Teaching Assistant (appointment/time) Maths after school club for KS3

Holiday revision sessions and summer activities

After school revision classes

Additional Maths, English and Science staff to increase KS4 curriculum delivery and reduction in class sizes

Staff training on effective feedback and marking of students work to ensure further progress

Revision materials and resources – increased department capitation

Additional leadership capacity within the school’s Senior Leadership Team via the promotion of key departmental heads to the position of Senior Leaders

Provision of essential uniform

Provision of essential equipment Success Centre staff time to work with targeted students

Year 11 residential for at students at risk of not achieving target grades in English and Maths to jump start progress

Year 11 careers day to ready students for the world of work

Year 7 residential to jump start students (funded by Y7 Catch-Up) who have been identified as being below level 4 on entry in English and / or Maths

The purchase of revision guides in English, maths and science for all PP students in years 10 and 11

These actions have impacted

directly on addressing the legacy

of progress and attainment of the

PP students to a position outlined

above of how the gap has closed

dramatically and now is below

national figures as outlined in

RAISE 2014 un-validated.

16

Deliver CPD for staff on Metacognition, to boost progress

What impact has Pupil Premium had for our students in 2014?

(Summer 2014 Y11 exam results)

CLOSING THE GAP INFORMATION - Year 11 2014 Disadvantaged pupils -

Best Entry

Other pupils -

Best Entry

Number of pupils 62 88

Percentage of pupils 47 53

Percentage achieving 5+ A*-C GCSEs (or equivalent) including English and

maths GCSEs 26 64

Percentage achieving 5+ A*-C GCSEs (GCSE ONLY) including English

and maths GCSEs 26 60

Percentage of pupils making expected progress in English 39 74

Percentage of pupils making more than expected progress in English 6 28

Percentage of pupils making expected progress in maths 30 70

Percentage of pupils making more than expected progress in maths 14 25

Percentage achieving A*-C English 34 70

Percentage achieving A*-C Maths 35 75

Percentage achieving A*-C Science (Incl. BTEC) 69 99

Further plans to use the allocation in 2014/15 to close any gaps include:

1) Establish a cross curricular working party to focus on raising achievement of pupil premium students and implement findings

2) EAL targeted interventions for students and families where progress is being hampered by lack of proficiency in English

3) Implementation of student tracking software which enables the performance of pupil premium and other vulnerable groups to be tracked real time and interventions applied on a more timely basis

What impact has Pupil Premium funding and initiatives (see above) had for our current students in

2014/2015?

(January 2015 current Y11 predicted performance)

17

CLOSING THE GAP INFORMATION - Year 11 2015 Disadvantaged

pupils

Other

pupils

All Pupils

Number of pupils 68 94 161

Percentage of pupils 42 58

Percentage achieving 5+ A*-C GCSEs (or equivalent) including

English and maths GCSEs 44% 63%

55%

Percentage of pupils making expected progress in English 68% 75% 72%

Percentage of pupils making more than expected progress in

English 25% 34%

30%

Percentage of pupils making expected progress in maths 56% 73% 66%

Percentage of pupils making more than expected progress in maths 22% 32% 28%

Percentage achieving A*-C English 69% 74% 72%

Percentage achieving A*-C Maths 62% 69% 66%

Percentage achieving A*-C Science (Incl. BTEC) 76% 75% 79%

M. McMahon

January 2015

Impact of Interventions

Detailed below evidence of the impact of the 3 Academic Mentors who have worked with targeted PP students to maximise progress and attainment in English, Maths, Science.

18

A. Impact of the English, Maths, and Science Academic Mentors

English Interventions

Summary – 33 students supported

13 of these are PP students and 12 of these have made progress or good progress in English.

Key

I = In-class support

W= Withdrawn from class/L4S to complete interventions

O= other intervention pre-school/study support after school

19

Maths Interventions

34 PP students supported of these 27 have made progress or good progress.

20

Science Interventions

21

Science Interventions

13 Y11 PP students supported 11/13 have made good or excellent progress.

B. Keeping PP high profile

All SIMS marksheets are coded with PP information so all staff are aware of the vulnerabilities (SEN/EAL) of all students, so that lesson plans and teaching strategies can accommodate the needs of all students.

C. Increased accountability

SLT/ELT/CLs are held to account for the relative progress of all vulnerable groups. ‘State of the Nation’ meetings are held with Principal where progress and attainment in each subject area are analysed. Action points are discussed and evaluated within the Senior Leadership Team. This informs actions within the ADP.

Pupil Premium indicator

on all SIMS marksheets

SIMS marksheets RAG

rated so all staff can

carefully track the

progress of all students.

QA process plus PM

schedule measures

progress of all vulnerable

groups

22

D. Governing Body The Finance and General Purposes GB and the Curriculum sub Committee regularly receive updates and review expenditure and progress re. closing the gap between PP v non PP students.

Detailed analysis of the relative progress of

all vulnerable groups including PP.

Colleagues/depts. are held to account, in

curricular and pastoral ‘State of the Nation’

line management meetings.

23

8 Pupil Premium Expenditure

8.1 - distributed Pupil Premium analysis (Appendix 4) which outlined the expenditure for the

current year. The percentage of expenditure on study support had been reduced as this had

been provided externally in the past but arrangements had now been made to provide this

support in-house.

8.2 Sixth form students being trained to support reading. Another group of students who were very

able had been working with a PhD student and most had submitted a 2,000 essay which was of

a standard that would be suitable for a degree level qualification.

8.3 The academic mentors were appointed in late January and worked particularly with Pupil

Premium students in order to ensure that work was underway to close the gap. Governors

were reminded that the critical indicators were whether the expenditure was being used

effectively and whether the gap between the achievement of Pupil Premium students and non-

Pupil Premium students was being narrowed. It was noted that work was underway and there

may not be a large impact in terms of Yr 11 results but lower down the school, the results were

encouraging.

8.4 A Governor asked about the funds used for trips and participation and whether this

made a difference to students. reported that if the trips abroad were considered, then it

made the trips viable for the Academy and meant that Pupil Premium students could travel

alongside those who were not in receipt of Pupil Premium. Music equipment was another area

where participation was increased as a result of the support of Pupil Premium funds. It was

Evidence of the involvement of the

Governing Body reviewing and

evaluating progress.

24

noted that this was difficult to measure but a qualitative analysis showed that this was effective.

It enabled students to have experiences that they would not usually have the opportunity to

participate in.

8.6 asked if there was any opportunity to develop family support by using Pupil Premium.

This would be investigated further as the involvement of families in students’ development was

useful. added that staff had worked on the Academy Development Plan and this was being

expanded so that a wider range of staff could engage and contribute to the plan.

E. Focus on developing teaching and learning The continued high priority on developing every teacher at OSCA through robust and differentiated CPD are having a big impact. This combined with a more rigorous accountability structure via line management and Performance Management are yielding improved rate of progress and much narrower gaps between PP and non PP students (see closing the gap section above).

We currently assess, through lesson observation, that 20% of teaching is outstanding, 93% good or better, with 7% requiring improvement. There are currently no teachers judged as regularly inadequate. We have also begun to use our Learning Walks and work scrutinies to define the ‘typical’ quality of teaching of individual members of staff. This provides us with a holistic picture. Since April 2013 there has been a rolling programme of paired observation training with Ofsted Inspectors. All senior leaders, all curriculum leaders and all assistant curriculum leaders have had their judgements assessed and validated, so we are confident in the accuracy of this data. A series of ‘departmental health checks’ also led by external, OAT Ofsted inspectors, informs our overall judgements of teaching and learning. This means the trajectory of the quality of teaching has been:

Outstanding Good + Requires Imp. Inadequate

Oct 2014 20% 87% 13% 0%

Jan. 2013 10% 46% 39% 5%

F. Pupil Premium Working Group This group have met several times as per the calendar to review existing practice, and development points (Agendas and action points available for scrutiny). Major priority is to establish a Breakfast Club led by Academic Mentors.

G. Key Stage 3, 4 and 5 RAP Meetings These rapid action planning meetings meet half termly where updates are shared, interventions and actions are determined and tracked. KS3 Agenda (28/1/15)

25

1) Flight paths and tracking

2) Progress of HATS and Boys

3) SIMs Chance Analysis – looking at DC2 A

KS4 Agenda (28/1/15)

1) Literacy target groups Y11 – S Clegg 3) EVA Software CPD – MW/DD

4) Identification of y10 intervention students.

Additionally these meetings lead to the preparation of CLs for their State of the Nation meetings, and their usage of EVA data analysis software. This software has greatly assisted in the efficient and quick evaluation of student performance data, by vulnerable group including PP v non PP.

H. Attendance of PP students

As a result of the work of the attendance team + pastoral team + Tutors, the attendance of PP students has improved dramatically over the last 3 years, the school overall attendance is now in excess of 97%+. The following table maps this improvement by year group over the last 3 years.

Y11 Maths recent data collection progression matrix,

which links with those presented in RAISE.

26

Attendance Measures

2012/2013 2013/2014 3rd Sept 2014- 22/1/2015

Year 7

Absence 4.2 3.5 2.5

Persistent Absence N/A N/A N/A

PP Absence 4 3 2.7

Non-PP Absence 2.3 1.6 2.1

Gap PP v Non PP 1.7 1.4 0.6

PP- PA N/A N/A N/A

Non PP –PA N/A N/A N/A

Year 8

Absence 4.6 3.4 1.8

Persistent Absence 0.4 N/A N/A

PP Absence 6.3 6 2

Non-PP Absence 4.6 4.2 1.7

Gap PP v Non PP 1.7 1.8 0.3

PP- PA 0.1 N/A N/A

Non PP – PA N/A N/A N/A

Year 9

Absence 5.2 3.9 3

Persistent Absence N/A 0.4 0.5

PP Absence 9 8 3.1

Non-PP Absence 5.4 4.2 3

Gap PP v Non PP 3.6 3.8 0.1

PP- PA 0.5 0.3 0.5

Non PP – PA 0.3 0.1 N/A

Year 10

Absence 7 3.6 3.2

Persistent Absence 1.2 0.4 0.6

PP Absence 6.3 4.7 3.8

Non-PP Absence 4.2 3 2.7

27

Gap PP v Non PP 2.1 1.7 1.1

PP- PA 3.7 0.3 0.6

Non PP – PA 1.2 0.1 N/A

Year 11

Absence 4.3 4.2 2.3

Persistent Absence 0.7 0.6 N/A

PP Absence 6.1 6 2.7

Non-PP Absence 3.2 2.6 2

Gap PP v Non PP 2.9 3.4 0.7

PP-PA 0.8 0.6 N/A

Non PP – P A N/A N/A N/A

OSCA Sixth

Absence 3

Persistent Absence 1.4

PP Absence 4

Non-PP Absence 2.9

Gap PP v Non PP 0 0 1.1

PP - PA 1.4

Non PP - PA N/A

I. Analysis of Fixed Term Exclusions

28

Conclusion

The impact of these interventions and the holistic benefits of developing the practice of all colleagues has enabled the gaps between PP and non PP to be closed to a position in excess of national figures to a position way below national (particularly in English).

Academy Development Plan

Closing the gap for the PP students, and for other vulnerable groups remain a priority. These priorities are included in our Academy Pevelopment Plan. Regular review and evaluation of these priorities enable OSCA to ‘fine tune’ our interventions and ensure we maximise the learning opportunities of all our students.

This data shows that over time

and compared to National

figures, the impact of our pastoral

interventions are greatly reducing

our fixed term exclusion rates.

The gap between PP and Non-PP

is smaller than the national gap.