Ash Hill Pupil Premium Strategy Statement

1. Summary information
School

Ash Hill Primary

Academic Year

2016-17

Total PP budget

131,314

Date of most recent PP Review

Internal July 16

Total number of pupils

208

Number of pupils eligible for PP

88

Date for next PP Strategy Review

Jan 2017

2. Current attainment
Please note that at the time of writing, progress measures for 2016 data
have not yet been published.

Pupils eligible for PP (your

school)

Pupils not eligible for PP

(national average)

2016 % achieving the expected standard in reading, writing & maths

38.5%

All pupils 53%

2015 % achieving Level 4b or above in reading, writing & maths (or

equivalent)

73%

85%

2015 % making at least 2 levels of progress in reading (or equivalent)

100%

92%

2015 % making at least 2 levels of progress in writing (or equivalent)

100%

95%

2015 % making at least 2 levels of progress in maths (or equivalent)

100%

91%

3. Barriers to future attainment (for pupils eligible for PP)

In-school barriers
A.

The percentage of pupils working at age related expected levels and above in maths are lower in every year group for PP pupils than non PP.
Percentages of PP pupils making expected progress in maths last year was lower in every year group than for non PP peers.

B.

Many pupils in Early Years and KS1 have poor language and communication skills. Reading Recovery and language intervention are key and need
to continue.

C.

Poor emotional resilience and self-regulation skills impact on many pupils ability to work collaboratively and to accept a degree of challenge in their
learning.

External barriers
D.

The percentage of pupils with attendance below 95% is much higher for PP pupils than non PP.

4. Outcomes (Desired outcomes and how they will be measured)

Success criteria

A.

Increase the proportions of PP pupils working at and above expected levels in maths. Improve rates of
progress in maths for all PP pupils.

Percentage of PP pupils making

expected or accelerated progress in
maths is greater than peers.

B.

Early gaps in literacy skills are closed.

C.

Self-regulation skills continue to be developed through the use of the Lets Get Smart behaviour system. A
common language of learning is developed which promotes the Growth Mindset philosophy.

Attainment as measured by GLD and

KS1 teacher assessment should be at
least equivalent for PP and non-PP
pupils in areas of Communication and
Language
Behaviour or
forReading.
learning improves,

D.

Improved attendance figures for PP pupils. Fewer PP pupils with attendance less than 95%.

evidenced by 20% fewer visits to the

RtL station by the end of the Autumn
term.
Attendance for PP pupils improves
from 94% to be at least in line with the
school average. The percentage of PP
pupils with attendance below 95% is
reduced.

5. Planned expenditure
A

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?

Extensive in-house CPD

to launch new maths
curriculum in Sept.
Triads and team teaching
to share good practice.
A clear system for
teaching times tables and
number bonds is being
launched.

We want and need to improve maths teaching

for all across the school as it has not been a
focus so far. The 2015 NFER report is clear that
high quality teaching for all is fundamental to
supporting the attainment of disadvantaged
pupils.

Monitoring cycle: learning walks and book

scrutinies.

KN

January 2017

Employment of a second
EYP in Reception every
day (3 staff, ratio 1:10)

We want to improve speech and language skills

for all pupils. This tool allows an individualised
programme to be set for each child. The EEF
Teaching and Learning toolkit shows that oral
language interventions have a highly positive
impact on learning and future outcomes.

Monitoring cycle. Tool has internal

assessment progress measures.

ML & SS

January 2017

Many of our pupils have social and emotional

needs that impact on their ability to work with
others, to deal with disappointment and to
persevere with challenging tasks. It is the aim of
the SLT to change the culture of the school and
to help all pupils develop as well-rounded
confident lifelong learners regardless of their
background or circumstances.
A huge amount of CPD time during the
academic year 2015-16 was spent on building a
shared understanding of the LGS system across
the school community. The NFER report
highlights addressing behaviour and providing
strong social and emotional support as key
building blocks to raising the attainment of
disadvantaged pupils.

Monitoring of class behaviour files, number

of visits to RtL/RtP, token totals and
exclusion data.

KN

January 2017

Systematic use of
language screening and
targeted teaching tool in
Reception.

The Lets Get Smart

behaviour system was
introduced in 2015-16 but
now needs to be
embedded and refined.
Growth mindset principles
have also been introduced
but now need further
strengthening.

Pupil voice surveys and learning walks.

Total budgeted cost

56,516

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?

Academic mentoring in Y6
from AHT to ensure high
quality feedback to pupils.
1:1 teaching and tutoring
for pupils with significant
gaps in their maths
learning.
New intervention
programme.

Many different evidence sources including the

EEF Teaching and Learning toolkit suggests that
feedback is a very effective way to impact
learning.
1:1 or small group tuition, although costly, is also
shown in the toolkit to accelerate learning. We
will be using experienced teachers and where
possible these will be working in the classes
where supported pupils are drawn from to
ensure maximum linking with the everyday
classroom teaching.

Monitoring cycle including session

observations and half termly data analysis.

ML

January 2017

Employment of a Reading
Recovery teacher to target
Y1children.

These approaches were all successful last year

(see below) and need to continue. We will
expand provision so that additional children can
be targeted in small groups for reading in Y1 as
the time demands of full RR mean that not all
pupils will be able to access it.

Monitoring cycle including session

observations, progress measures and pupil
voice.

ML
TC for R, W Inc
JL for RR

January 2017

Some of our pupils need a more individualised

approach to support their social and emotional
needs. The EEF toolkit studies show that effect
sizes are larger for targeted interventions
matched to specific students with particular
needs or behavioural issues, than for universal
interventions or whole school strategies.

Monitoring cycle including session

observations and pupil voice. Monitoring of
class behaviour files, number of visits to
RtL/RtP, token totals and exclusion data.

ML, KN

January 2017

Read, Write Inc sessions

in small ability groups led
by teachers and LAs.
Language interventions
such as Talk Boost.

Individual children
targeted for 1:1 support
from learning mentor or
groups to develop
emotional wellbeing and
resilience. Priority will be
given to PP pupils with
most need.
Nurture group will continue
and a new one will start.
Play therapist employed
by the school initially for
one term to allow us to
support the emotional
wellbeing of individual
pupils.

Total budgeted cost

101,512

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?

Families targeted with

regular attendance
meetings. Several families
are now in the system for
fining by the local
authority.
Family support worker
employed by school
initially for one term to
address family issues
which may be impacting
on attendance.

Poor attendance leads to gaps in learning and

must be addressed. Some of our families have a
long history of poor attendance. Internal case
studies demonstrate that meetings to discuss
and address issues can make a significant
difference, as can ultimately the threat of fines.
However some families are in need of support
but dont meet criteria for local services. If we
employ our own support worker then we can
choose how to deploy her and ensure a swift
response to issues that arise.

Half termly reports form support worker on

individual cases.
Regular meetings with attendance officer to
monitor attendance rates and figures.

ML

Jan 2017
(decide whether to renew contract
with support worker)

Total budgeted cost

10,576

Entire budgeted cost 168,604

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
Cost
(and whether you will continue with this approach)

To raise standards in writing

Focus for CPD and

monitoring. Introduction
of published writing
folders and providing
exciting real life events
for the children to write
about e.g. circus skills,
Stomp!

Published writing folders containing examples of pupils best

writing are of a very high standard and reflect high levels of
progress over time.

Next year the focus will be on maths but the commitment to raising
standards in writing and systems put in place this year to support this, will
continue.

20,000

Implementation of whole
school positive
behaviour approach,
Lets Get Smart. Led by
an Educational
Psychologist.

Lets Get Smart (a positive approach to behaviour,

implemented in September 2015) has been highly effective in
improving pupils behaviour. Monitoring demonstrates that
pupils are developing greater self-awareness and prosocial
behaviours. 93% of parents agree that behaviour at the school
has improved since September 2015. 100% of staff believe
that pupils behaviour has improved since September 2015.
See also SEF June 16 for more detail.

The most important thing about a system such as this is a completely

consistent approach throughout the school. We are still working towards
this and with our new AHT in place we will embed and refine the system.

10,000 EP

Employment of a second
EYP in Reception every
morning (3 staff, ratio
1:10)

61% of Reception children achieved a good level of

development with minimal difference in percentages of PP
and non-PP pupils. This figure has rapidly improved: in 2014
only 17% of Reception children achieved GLD.

We will now employ 3 members of staff in Reception every day and target
language and communication skills through small group work.

10,000

To improve behaviour for

learning across the school

To ensure Reception
children have a strong
foundation for learning

Y6 data shows that we are much closer to the national picture

in SPAG and writing than in other subjects. (SPAG Sch: 67%
Nat: 72%, Writing Sch: 70% Nat: 74%). The progress score for
writing is -0.7 which was the best out of the 3 areas. In Y2
writing was the strongest subject when compared to other
schools in the local authority with 72% of children achieving at
least the expected standard. This reflects the impact of the
systematic school improvement we have made to engage
children in writing and SPAG learning through our creative
curriculum over the last 12 months this was our highest
priority, and has been successful.
This approach has benefited all children but in some classes
(Y3, Y4 and Y6) progress in writing has been better for PP
pupils than non-PP.

36,000
staffing

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 for

pupils in Y2 and Y6

1:1 and small group

tutoring by experienced
teachers.

Y6 comparative progress data from KS1 to KS2 is not yet

available.
According to Teacher Assessments, targeted Y6 PP pupils
made expected or accelerated progress this year in greater
proportions than their peers in reading and in writing but not in
maths.

Y6: Many children were targeted for maths tuition, not just the PP
pupils which can blur the comparison. However for PP pupils
progress in maths was not rapid enough or sustained enough. We
will change the approach in Y6 next year by using the AHT to ensure
that strong links are made between classroom practice (ongoing
maths teaching) and tuition.
Targeted support will also be aimed at Y5 and Y4 in the Autumn
term.
We will continue to deploy this teacher in Y2 but will ensure that
provision is better monitored, tracked and linked to ongoing
classroom teaching and KPIs.

1:1 Y6 11,350
Small group Y6
11,540

In Y2 support for developing reading skills was highly effective

with PP pupils outperforming non PP in reaching the expected
standards. They also made better progress. The picture was
more mixed for writing and maths with some individuals
making accelerated progress and others not.

Y2 support 6,800
Total: 29, 690

Ensure early gaps in literacy

rates are closed

Employment of a
Reading Recovery
teacher to target
Y1children.

8 children have accessed, or at least begun, the Reading

Recovery programme this year. Whilst those children have
made or begun to make good progress there are still too many
children working at below the expected level in reading (31%)
and writing (24%). There is however no difference in
proportions of PP and non PP working below the expected
level.

We will continue with Reading Recovery with PP pupils having

priority. We will also pay for more of the RR teachers time to work
with other individuals and small groups in Y1.

24,000

Ensure early gaps in literacy

rates are closed

Read, Write Inc

sessions in small ability
groups led by teachers
and LAs.

76% of Y1 children passed the phonics screening with

proportions of PP and non PP passes being equivalent. 75%
of Y2 children passed the rescreen with pass rates better for
PP than non PP (although only 4 pupils in total so percentages
are misleading.)

We will continue with Read, Write Inc but next year will ensure the
teacher with overall responsibility has adequate time to lead and
monitor provision.

9,000

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

iii. Other approaches

Desired outcome

Chosen action
/ approach

To support the emotional

and social needs of
vulnerable pupils.

Nurture group, ratio 2:8,

two afternoons each
week.

Learning mentor
supporting most
vulnerable pupils with
1:1 sessions and regular
check-ins.

The group has been running for two terms so exit Boxall
scores have not yet been taken for comparison. However all
staff and pupil voice surveys have shown that they feel it has
had a positive impact on the children both in the sessions and
back in class. 5 out of 7 pupils (1 left the school) made
expected or better progress this year. The 2 pupils that didnt
have SEN.

We will continue with the Nurture group to ensure that it has run for a
year as recommended. We will review the exit Boxalls In December
and decide whether to run a second group.

The work of the learning mentor prevented the permanent

exclusion of a very disaffected Y6 pupil and improved the
persistent absence and lateness of one PP pupil from below
88% to be 96% by the end of the year.

The work of the learning mentor needs to be more tightly focused

with clear outcomes for individuals. Her time was diverted this year
by pupils who needed 1:1 support (and eventually had this
recognised through EHC plans) and staff absence.

26,000

Total budgeted cost 164,690