Prestwich Arts College

Pupil Premium and Catch-up Premium Funding Plan

2017-18(Final Review)

Prior Data – comparing PP and non-PP students

2017 Outcomes 2018 Outcomes

% Students Achieving PP Non-PP PP Non-PP

9-4 Basics38% 47% 47% 57%

9-5 Basics20% 26% 25% 34%

4+ English54% 70% 63% 73%

4+ Maths48% 55% 49% 63%

5+ English 40% 52% 46% 52%

5+ Maths 23% 28% 26% 42%

Progress 8 -0.6 -0.28 -0.39 -0.29

Attainment 8 36.53 41.46 38.31 46.57

Ebac 4+ 6.15 18.39 20.6% 24.4%

What is pupil premium funding? The Secretary of State for Education lays down the following terms and conditions on which assistance is given in relation to the pupil premium grant (PPG) payable to schools and local authorities. PPG provides funding for two policies: ● raising the attainment of disadvantaged students of all abilities to reach their potential and close the gaps between them and their peers ● supporting children and young people with parents in the regular armed forces

Pupil premium provides funding for pupils in the following categories: ● Those who have been in receipt of free school meals (Ever6 FSM) since the age of 4 in year groups reception to year 6 ● Those who have been in receipt of free school meals (Ever6 FSM) at any point in the past 6 years for year groups 7 - 11 ● Those who are defined as Looked-after children in the Children Act 1989 as one who is in the care of, or provided with accommodation by, an English local authority for year groups reception to year 11 (LAC or CYPIC)● Those who have ceased to be looked after by a local authority in England and Wales because of adoption, a special guardianship order, a child arrangements order or a residence order for year groups reception to year 11● Those students aged 4 years and over in year groups reception to year 11 whose parents are either currently serving in the armed forces (Ever6 service child) or in receipt of pensions under the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme (AFCS) and the War Pensions Scheme (WPS)

Prestwich Arts College Pupil Premium Profile 2017-18 (on roll)

2015-16 2016-17 September 2017 January 2018 May 2018

Total number of students 828 824 858 858 858Number of PP-eligible students 368 369 385 (381 funded) 385 (381 funded) 385 (381 funded)LAC/CYPIC 6 9 5 5 5Post-LAC/CYPIC 0 0 0 0 0Service Children 0 0 0 0 0Percentage of whole school total 44.44% 44.78% 44.87% 44.87% 44.87%Total Pupil Premium Budget £344,080 £345,015 £356,235 £356,235 £351,093

The percentage of students supported by PP funding has remained steady over the past 3 years. This remains the case after a small rise in students on roll.

Pupil Premium-Plus Funding Pupil premium plus is the term used for pupil premium funding of £1900 for eligible pupils who fall into specific categories: 1) Pupils defined as ‘looked after children’ in the Children Act of 1989 as; one who is in the care of, or provided with accommodation by, an English Local Authority for year groups reception to year 11 or 2) Pupils who have ceased to be ‘looked after’ by a local authority in England and Wales because of adoption, a special guardianship order, a child arrangements order or a residence order for year groups reception to year 11

Unlike PP funding which is used collectively to support disadvantaged pupils, pupil premium plus in relation to LAC/CfC must be used specifically for that child and is NOT included in the pupil premium available spend or total figures. Pupil premium plus funding for eligible POST LAC students is to be used under the conditions of the grant and to raise attainment but is not exclusively for the individual POST LAC student.

Looked After Children (LAC)/Child or Young Person in Care (CYPIC)- Looked After Children (LAC)/Child or Young Person in Care (CYPIC) - Funding is provided to school by the Local Authority responsible for the care of the child. We have 5 pupils who are LAC/CYPIC from 4 different

Local Authorities in 2017-18. Funding is paid on an instalment basis and released by the virtual school team twice a year on the condition that school have met specific requirements including the completion of a Personal Education Plan (PEP). Funding breaks down as;

- Bury Students are funded at £100 per term and any additional funding identified through the PEP is applied for through the Virtual Head.- Manchester students are funded at £500 per term- Salford students are funded at £400 per term- We have yet to receive any funding for the Warrington student as they are new to the school.

- Basic provision should be - Bury – 1 student £ 300- Salford 2 students £2400- Manchester 1 student £1500- Warrington 1 student £1200 (approx.)- Total funding due before claims £5400

POST looked after children (LAC) Funding is provided to schools by the Local Authority for pupils who have ceased to be looked after by a local authority in England and Wales because of adoption, a special guardianship order, a child arrangements order or a residence order for year group’s reception to year 11. Parents/carers are required to notify the school in these circumstances and provide evidence of the court order. Information is not transferable between schools (Department for Education). Schools must include these pupils on the January census to ensure funding is received.

How Pupil premium funding is received and how we allocate funds The school believes that all students who are eligible for Pupil Premium should be our focus, regardless of whether they have claimed funding. Pupil premium funding is based upon pupils registered on roll in school with the Department for Education at the school census with funding being received in April the same year. This census information is collated and checked against other data sources (Local Authority, Service children data etc.) and an update of individual students is provided to school in July of each year of all those who are entitled. However, as this information is collated and funded retrospectively we are still required to identify pupil need and focus for all our pupil premium students throughout the whole school in each academic year. In order to do this we have additional data capture methods that assist us in identifying those students who may be eligible for pupil premium before we receive the census check update information in July. This enables us to work with these students immediately from the start of the academic year. Current breakdown on roll by year group

The following table shows the breakdown of pupil premium students by graph Year group. These totals are based on the number of pupils who we have identified as having pupil premium eligibility and we are actively supporting with pupil premium funding.

Year Group PP Eligible11 71

10 76

9 73

8 68

7 70

What is catch-up Premium funding?

This is additional funding provided by the Government and was specific to year 7 students in 2015-16 who did not achieve National Curriculum Level 4 at the end of KS2 in either Mathematics or English reading. It is only allocated during the year 7 academic year. The catch up premium funding plan is often inextricably linked with the pupil premium plan as a high proportion of students fall into both categories. The funding should be strategically spent to target the gap in performance for these students to ensure that they “catch-up” with their peers and have full access to the curriculum. Changes to KS2 levels for

academic year 16/17 onwards have meant that we no longer receive this funding based on the KS2 performance of students. The Government confirms ‘In 2016 to 2017 schools will receive the same overall amount of year 7 catch-up premium funding they received in 2015 to 2016, adjusted to reflect the percentage change in the size of their year 7 cohort, based on the October 2016 census’. We are therefore estimating funding of roughly £16,000 based upon our allocation in 16/17.

Focus of Funding allocated 2016-2017

The aim of our Pupil Premium (PP) funding at Prestwich Arts College is to raise the attainment of all disadvantaged pupils of all abilities and to close the gaps between them and their peers. We do this by ensuring that the funding is strategically targeted to effectively address barriers to success and academic progress/achievement between PP and non-PP students. When identifying strategies and allocating funding we consider the impact of previous experience within our school context, as well as applying knowledge gained from external research including the Educational Endowment Foundation and the Sutton Trust. We will use a range of measures to evaluate the impact of the funding allocation as an ongoing process throughout each academic year. These include headline measures, internal tracking systems, individualised monitoring and evaluation processes which are developed in conjunction with staff who have specific responsibilities for reviewing our pupil premium spend and actions. The school allocates its funding in the following key areas; ● Curriculum - Particular focus on Literacy and Numeracy across the curriculum and specific intervention strategies to target the attainment and progress gaps between PP and non PP students in all year groups. ● Specific need - Pupils who are identified with a specific need including SEND students, high attaining students on entry, those eligible for FSM and pupils with behavioural issues are supported to ensure that the gap between PP and non PP students with these needs narrows. ● Teaching and Learning - To develop strong and focused learning throughout the curriculum through a culture of consistency and creativity. A focus on sharing teaching and learning to narrow the gap in attainment and progress between PP and non PP students whilst improving provision for all. ● Cultural capital - Access to extra-curricular/enrichment opportunities, regardless of the student’s background so that all aspects of the learned curriculum are available to all students. ● Attendance and punctuality - to implement strategies to address the gap in attendance and punctuality rates between PP and non PP students.

Development and additions following evaluation 2016-2017

- Clear method to highlight specific spend and address staff requests - Termly review of all actions- Interventions for attendance and punctuality - Numeracy focus- Intervention at KS4- Coaching of PP students who are furthest from expected progress after data points - Internal CPD and Learning Community Programme - Enrichment and Extra-curricular- Behaviour support- Most Able students - SEMH and Pastoral support

Curriculum (Literacy)

Specific Focus Barriers to Overcome Intended Outcome/Success Criteria Rationale (why)Narrowing the gap in literacy for disadvantaged pupils, especially in reading levels, from KS2.

- Low literacy levels from KS2- Exam literacy (subject specific)- Disengagement in reading- EAL late stage learners - Access to books/reading at

home

- Reading skills improved by at least +1 in both NRSS and Percentile (each year) through Accelerated Reader

- Students access, and use, texts outside of school

- Improved engagement and attainment at KS3 and KS4

- Students better able to access texts and papers for exams.

Success in all subjects, and especially in new specifications, has a greater basis in literacy.

EEF research shows that Accelerated Reader adds 5+ months to a pupils Oral language and reading ability.

Developed Strategies & Actions Accelerated Reader for years 7-9 Clear staff knowledge of those students with low reading levels (KS2) CLAS to work with EAL students on reading and skills/methods to improve Literacy co-ordinator to support with whole-school actions for supporting reading Internal CPD on supporting literacy and exam literacy Whole-school ‘tier 2 and tier 3 words’ system Success maker programme for pupils 2+ years below chronological reading and spelling age

How is it evidenced? Costs Person Monitoring1) Accelerated Reader data monitored by the Literacy Co-ordinator

and fed back to staff to show reduction in literacy gaps2) Lesson observations, Class Charts and teaching show the focus on

those with lower reading levels. 3) CLAS data to show improvement in EAL literacy 4) Resources and emails sent out to staff. Staff voice and lesson

observations. 5) CPD resources, staff evaluation and student voice. 6) Student voice and parent voice

£2300 per annum £800 per annum

£18, 860

£4000 ParentMail

KS

PT and NS

PT & CLAS TeamKS and PP Lead

NSNS

Evaluation of Impact

Term 1 ClassCharts software has been purchased and launched with staff in December 2017. Two Learning Briefings (internal CPD) have shown the use

of the software to staff and how it can; highlight PP students, change seating plans to use lead-learners, and focus questioning on PP students. Term 2 will see checks on staff set up (each class created) and the use of the software (QA cycle)

Accelerated reader (used for all year groups) for Term 1 saw the following impact. PP students make more rapid progress from their starting point:

Year 7 Year 8 Year 9PP Non-PP PP Non-PP PP Non-PP

NRSS +3 +1 +1 0 0 +1PR +7 +3 +2 0 +1 0RA +0.04 +0.02 +0.01 0 0 +0.01SS +43 +13 +7 +3 +14 +1

One whole-school CPD session on ‘Advantaging the Disadvantaged was run by RJF and RE1. This formed part of the Term 1 INSET day. Staff can also access the resources through the internal T&L drive. Further CPD on strategies, specific actions and links to ClassCharts in Term 2.

Staff and student voice on supporting PP students has done been completed in term 1. To be done in term 2. Literacy co-ordinator has yet to start the ‘Tier 2’ and ‘Tier 3’ language programme. This will be launched in Term 2 via; the newsletter, Form

Time and interactions with students. CLAS team has worked with all EAL students, including PP, on improving literacy for overall progress. Data for Term 1 shows:

EAL PP EAL Non-PP Diff7 0.8 0.39 +0.418 3.76 4.07 -0.319 7.19 7.27 -0.0810 -0.04 0.37 -0.4111 0.61 -0.02 +0.63

Staff have taken part in CPD on exam literacy including; question dissection, techniques in lessons and retention tasks. Next step is to form a consistent method for dissecting questions which can be used by all subjects.

Term 2

Reading age of students has been added to Sims for all staff to access. This has also been supported by internal CPD on ‘Advantaging the Disadvantaged’. Staff informed of how to find reading ages of PP students in order to ascertain specific need.

Literacy Co-ordinator is now being Line Managed by AHT for Outcomes and PP. New action plan and Literacy Policy has been written and will see new actions such as; tiered words, Year 7 paired reading, Form activities, DEAR time etc.

CPD has been increased this term to promote literacy, especially in support of PP students. Morning sessions have included, Exam Literacy, BUGS to support exam dissection, ‘Walk-it-talk-it’ mocks, and using literacy and PP data on ClassCharts.

World Book Day was fully prepared for and detailed with staff. However, the day itself was called-off due to snow causing the school closure. Tiered Words system has been started by the Literacy Co-ordinator. This is in its infancy and requires further pushing with staff in briefing. The

first attempt, over a 3-week period, saw the following results in student analysis: Roughly half of students had heard each word over the 3 weeks 100% knew the meaning of ‘grandiose’ 90% knew ‘exemplary’ 100% knew ‘justify’.- Accelerated reader (used for all year groups) for Term 2 saw the following impact. Results have been skewed by one class missing from each year

group. PP students are shown to be making equal or greater progress than their non-PP peers.

Year 7 Year 8 Year 9PP Non-PP PP Non-PP PP Non-PP

NRSS 0 -1 +1 +1 +1 0PR -1 -2 +3 +1 +5 -2RA +0.01 +0.01 +0.05 +0.03 +0.05 0SS +12 +9 +47 +34 +48 +3

Term 3

Furthers sessions of ‘Advantaging the Disadvantaged’ have been completed during Term 3. Staff have begun to utilise Reading Age in their ClassCharts seating plans. These seating plans have now been added to the T&L standard operating procedures (Great Expectations).

Literacy Co-ordinator line management has seen the planning completed for a Year 7 PP Reading Groups (peer reading) to start in 2018-19. Form activities have been provided and launched during vertical form sessions.

CPD has continued on the topic of literacy support for PP students. Additional sessions on; BUGS, structure strips and GAPS marking. Tiered Words system has proved unsuccessful. Literacy co-ordinator’s drive, staff buy-in and line management has not been strong enough to

support this as a whole-school idea. Accelerated reader (used for all year groups) for Term 3 saw the following impact. This has been with the backdrop of issues in running the

process via The Gateway.

Year 7 Year 8 Year 9PP Non-PP PP Non-PP PP Non-PP

NRSS +1 +1 +0 -1 +2 +2PR +2 +1 +0 -3 +5 +3RA +0.04 +0.03 +0.01 +0.01 +0.06 +0.05SS +38 +10 +11 +10 +48 +30

- Only in scaled score has AR shown to make a real impact on the reading scores of Year 7-9 this term. This is also only the case for years 7 and 9. - Other measures have seen stagnation, or levels of improvement that do not note success. - AR must be reviewed for it efficacy and breadth of use next year.

Curriculum (Numeracy)

Specific Focus Barriers to Overcome Intended Outcome/Success Criteria Rationale (why)Narrow the gap of numeracy from KS2 (scaled scores) to give these students greater access to the wider curriculum (and Maths). Gap to be seen from baseline testing in Maths (October assessment) to final assessment in Year 7.

- Low numeracy levels at KS2- Understanding technical

language - Ability to tackle ‘problem-

solving’ aspects of Maths.

- Student understanding of specific Maths language improves

- Improved engagement and attainment at KS3 and KS4.

- Students able, and willing, to tackle problem-solving tasks.

- Clear improvement between baseline (October) and final exam (end of year) with Year 7

Issues in basic numeracy can lead to a negative view of Maths and limit academic achievement.

Whole-school support, and a specific focus on low ability Year 7, should increase confidence in Maths. EEF sees the positive impact of TA heightened when working with small groups/individuals on a specific focus.

Developed Strategies & Actions Support AHoF with numeracy in the curriculum Identify a small Year 7 group of students who are below in Maths ability (KS2 and baseline) for small group intervention (TA Form) Specific teaching of technical language and problem-solving in Maths lessons.

How is it evidenced? Costs Person Monitoring1) Specific Maths activities provided and disseminated by the AHoF. 2) Baseline testing, and subsequent results, to show level of

improvement in basic numeracy (October to end of Year)3) Work scrutiny, observations and faculty moderation

£2,640 a year MML

PT and RW

RW (PT to monitor)

Evaluation of ImpactTerm 1

- Work scrutiny has taken place in Maths which has shown that Problem Solving questions have been added to exams in KS3. However, teaching

does not yet show a consistent method for tackling these problems, nor clear evidence of lesson-based work. Term 2 must see an increase in their completion, and a common system for showing/tackling them.

- Baseline testing in the faculty has led to the following data at Term 1. However, the nature of the testing has led to questions over the data (SLE visit confirmed this). 171 students in Year 7, 47% of which are PP.

PP making at least ‘Sound Progress’: 96.3% Non-PP making at least ‘Sound Progress’: 93.4%- One learning briefing (internal CPD) has been delivered for the use of numeracy in ‘Do Now/Through the Door’ activities.

Term 2

- Term 2 has seen large changes to the Maths faculty in the school. One temporary and one full-time staff member have left during the term. We have also used this as an opportunity to employ two Lead Practitioners and a new numeracy Co-ordinator (LG).

- Numeracy has also been added to the new Form Time fortnightly activity plan. Activities for this will be planned by the Numeracy Co-ordinator to be delivered by Form tutors. LG to collate evidence of this work.

- Action planning for LG will be completed in the first two week of Term 3. This will also include the creation of a Year 7 catch-up group for numeracy.

Term 3- Numeracy line management has commenced and has started with a focus on creating resources to support Numeracy in Form time. Resources

are not available on the K drive and are being utilised in a number of Form groups. - Initial review (form walks) have seen a varied level of engagement from students and staff. Specific impact has not been clear to see, and will be

a focus for 2018-19. - Numeracy Ninja has been purchased by the Maths department and is being utilised as lesson starters to improve the base numeracy of all. This is

having the most positive initial impact on a number of PP students as the aim is to provide rapid progress for those with a shortfall in base numeracy. Clear tracking of this process will be a focus in 2018-19 to show specific impact.

- Numeracy Line Management has seen the LSG given a clear remit of creating a pathway for Year 7 numeracy in 2018-19 which will tackle those in need of catch-up from KS2. Specifics can be found in Numeracy line management documentation, but will focus on a small group of PP students for whom base numeracy is the clear barrier.

Curriculum (Intervention)

Specific Focus Barriers to Overcome Intended Outcome/Success Criteria Rationale (why)To intervene with PP students (and others) when data tracking shows they are below target level in specific subjects.

- Lack of willingness to attend - Parental support- Accuracy of data and basis

for it- Planning of sessions- Staff availability

Students WAG and prediction improve based on targeted, and specific, intervention. Participation increases over the school year from each review point.

PIXL and EEF research shows that targeted intervention, parental contact and diagnostic work on areas of weakness can speed up progress at all key stages.

Developed Strategies & Actions Set specific days for Maths and English and a night for Pot 2 subjects (with specific PP students in groups) Create clear groups based on assessment data Tracking of groups and parental contact, via letters in the first instance Meetings with students and parents is non-attendance occurs Clear foci for each session based on areas of weakness and student requirement

How is it evidenced? Costs Person Monitoring1) Afternoon sessions arranged with RST, publicised to Year 11 in

assembly 2) Sims and 4 Matrix data to be used to create groups after first Year

11 data point 3) Tracking spreadsheet and letter on the shared drive. Updated by

attendance 4) Tracked by PP co-ordinator with evidence or meetings 5) Drop-ins to sessions by SLT and HoF

£500 per annum

£16,074.23 per annum

£21,440.23 per annum

PT

PT/JS and HoF

JS, PT and intervention teachers

PTPT and SLT

Evaluation of ImpactTerm 1

- Current data shows PP students predicted at 0.14 compared to non-PP at 0.04

- In the first term, sessions ran consistently in; Maths, English, Science and Food Technology. Initial groups were based on gaps in progress, and had inconsistent attendance. Overall impact saw (from the first data collection to the second):

Maths Foundation – 80% improved and 20% remained on the same grade Maths Higher – 44% improved, 50% remained on the same grade, and 6% went down a grade. English – 32% improved, 21% stayed the same, and 47% went down a grade (due to the moderation within the faculty) Science – 12% improved, 73% stayed the same, and 15% went down a grade. Food Technology – 13 students were chosen, with 100% improving their grade. 50% improved by 2 grades or more. - This data will be analysed to show the difference between PP and non-PP using a specifically designed Spreadsheet and 4 Matrix. - Letter was created by PP lead and used by all departments to inform parents/students of intervention. Term 2 will see the use of ParentMail to

send notification of days and sessions. - Tracking of attendance has not been well completed or collated in Term 1. This has led to inconsistent data and less effective tracking of impact. - Drop-ins (with chocolates brought for staff and students) has seen a very positive and purposeful working environments.

Term 2- Intervention sessions have run throughout Term 2 on a weekly basis, utilising both lunchtime and after school. Attendance has gradually

approved amongst PP students, but it has also remained inconsistent. This includes staff inconsistency as well, both in terms of illness and cancellations.

- ParentMail has been used to contact parents regarding intervention, Easter school and CA deadlines. This has been utilised to ensure parents of PP students (and others) are aware of available sessions and deadlines. Students have also been contacted via the school email account.

- Easter school has been on offer to support PP students in; Food, Physics, MFL, Drama, Media, Chemistry, Citizenship, Science, History, Geography, Maths, English, Music, Biology, and Computing.

- Intervention impact for PP students in Term 2 has seen;

Subject Total Students PP Students PP Improved WAG (Number) PP Improved WAG (Percentage)

Food 10 4 0 0%Geography 23 6 1 17%Citizenship 22 4 1 25%Drama 8 5 0 0%Computer Science 5 2 1 50%Resistant Materials 15 8 1 13%English Language 29 8 4 50%English Literature 29 8 3 38%Physics 12 4 1 25%Maths 20 11 3 27%Combined Science 33 17 1 6%Business 11 6 1 17%French 23 9 0 0%Spanish 23 10 0 0%Art 12 12 0 0%Textiles 6 3 0 0%History 8 3 0 0%Biology 34 14 3 21%

Term 3

Intervention moved away from specific groups (PP, subject, CA focus) and toward revision session in a wide range of subjects. This included

Easter school (29 sessions) and May Half Term (8 sessions), whilst continuous sessions ran after school and at lunch time. ParentMail, the school website, email and assemblies were used to publicise the sessions. Attendance was very good. 2018 summer results showed a clear and positive impact from such focus on PP students. As seen on page 2 of this document, PP students

bettered their 2017 counterparts in all key progress indicators including; overall attainment, progress made and achievement in Maths, English and both (BASICS).

The gap in progress (the clearest measure of impact) between PP and non-PP students reduced to -0.1. This is a huge decrease and shows the impact of such clear strategies of intervention.

The improvement in the BASICS figure at 4+ (38% to 47%) also highlights the positive impact made by the school. Such a measure ensures that 9% more of our PP students this year are able to enter college with no requirement to re-sit Maths and English.

Intervention in 2018-19 will see a more specific plan launched in HT2 (after #10 data) which will take in to account a wide number of factors in creating groups. PP students will remain a focus and 4 Matrix (data analysis system) will be utilised to create groups and track the impact of intervention strategies.

Specific Need (SEND & EAL)

Specific Focus Barriers to Overcome Intended Outcome/Success Criteria Rationale (why)To ensure necessary support is given to key groups (in the PP group) to narrow the achievement gap.

- Specific student requirements based on SEN

- Language barrier (reading, writing and listening)

- Access arrangements - SEMH issues- Support for LAC/CYPIC

students

Students with specific needs are identified and supported to engage in lessons. Improvement in the results of ‘K’ SEN students in 2018 from 2017 results of:

-1.27 in P8 21.56 in A8

Giving all students the best chance to succeed by meeting specific needs and access arrangements.

Developed Strategies & Actions SEN detail to be provided for all students and utilised by staff EAL support from CLAS Access arrangements in place for all students in the lead up to mock exams and summer exams LAC/CYPIC students clearly identified for staff and supported appropriately

How is it evidenced? Costs Person Monitoring1) All staff to be aware of SEN of students, strategies and Pupil

Passport documents where relevant – seen in lesson observations 2) EAL students have the support from CLAS and that their progress is

tracked via EAL specialist teachers 3) Exam preparations show those students with AA and what is

needed 4) Check that staff has access to the lists, and are aware of, those

students who are LAC/CYPIC

£18,860

DW2 and ALS

CLAS

DW2 and CL

HP/DW2

Evaluation of ImpactTerm 1

- SEN provision is in place and information is available for all SEN students who are also PP.

34 Year 7 students are SEN and PP (5 has in-class support and 25 have been a part of SuccessMaker). 12 Year 8 students are SEN and PP (1 has in-class support and 11 have been part of SuccessMaker). 6 Year 9 students are SEN and PP (1 has in-class support and 3 have been part of SuccessMaker). 7 Year 10 students are SEN and PP (None have in-class support and 2 have been part of SuccessMaker). 6 Year 11 students are SEN and PP (1 has in-class support and 1 has been part of SuccessMaker). - Detail of SEN and PP status can also be found by all staff via the ClassCharts programme. - Access Arrangements for PP students are in place or being tested for. Current provision is: Year 11: 6 students with AA (4 PP) Year 10: 3 students with AA (2 PP) KS4 being checked: 10 students (4 PP)- Term 2 will see the use of the Mock exams to discern any further need.

Term 2

- LAC/CYPIC students (who also fall under PP) in Year 11 have been assigned a coach (HP – LAC Lead) to aid them through their GCSE period. This has allowed them to; draw up revision plans, create intervention timetables and gain further support with applications to post-16 provision.

- Mock examinations have shown a small number of PP students who will require Access Arrangements in the summer exam series. This has also shown that poor behaviour of students/social issues has led to parental contact with regards to future conduct and Access Arrangements. 6 out of 9 students requiring parental contact were PP.

- SEN and EAL has been added to ClassCharts and delivered to staff as a means to note disadvantage, alongside those deemed PP. ClassCharts are now expected as a part of each Teacher File for lesson observation.

Term 3

- Coaching of PP students (LAC/CYPIC) did not meet the required need as staff either did not find the time or did not have the competency. - Summer exams ran well in terms of Access Arrangement rooms for EAL and SEN students. However, rooming set aside for students due to

Behavioural/SEMH needs worked poorly and will not be repeated in 2018-19. - SEN results in 2018 (Progress 8 figure of -0.7) show that work must still be done on this area of the school’s practice.

Specific Need (Behavioural)

Specific Focus Barriers to Overcome Intended Outcome/Success Criteria Rationale (why)Reducing the number of long term/ongoing behaviour and SEMH issues to minimise their impact on lessons and progress for PP students and others

- Behaviour systems and levels of support

- Student behaviour - Lack of parental support- Difficult class mixtures and

supply staff - Staff strategies for

behaviour management - Ineffective behaviour

system

Calm and purposeful learning environment in all lessons to allow for progress. Pupils to attain targeted grades at a secure level.

Students are less likely to make progress if the behaviour in lessons is poor. PP students are often those more likely to be impacted by poor behaviour in lessons.

Developed Strategies & Actions Track behaviour issues with greater accuracy (to see PP students) and engage with parents/carers more frequently when needed Create a clear system for behaviour support (increased behaviour patrol also) in order to track lessons/students causing concern Take necessary action to reduce the impact of those students consistently behaving poorly Offer staff training for engaging PP students who may otherwise disengage with learning Effectively provide support groups via ‘Turnaround’ and Inclusion to support SEMH students

How is it evidenced? Costs Person Monitoring1) Tracking data of: reports, the Fold, RR and Behaviour Patrol to see

clear issues of students and lessons 2) Keep track of behaviour meetings with parents and their outcome 3) Monitor the number of FTE and their impact 4) Training, resources and staff evaluations of sessions. Lesson

observations and drop-ins.

£13,012 and £29,575

£35,940.87

SW/House Managers

House Managers & SLT DW2DW2

Evaluation of ImpactTerm 1

- DW2 has brought in a new behaviour system and shared this with students and staff (via assembly and internal CPD)- Current ‘Turnaround’ programme has been aimed at students with trouble accessing mainstream education. First group of 5 has 4 PP students.

- Term 1 Exclusions saw: 67 Fixed-term Exclusion (58 PP) 3 Permanent Exclusions (3 PP)

Term 2- The new behaviour model (CAP) has been fully embedded to the school now since its full launch and the work of the DHT. - Training has been conducted by an outside agency (arranged by DHT) on re-engaging students showing negative behaviour. A great deal of this

focused on the possible background of PP students. Training has also been led by AHT on understanding the needs of PP students and small methods to support them.

- Turnaround cohort (4 out of 5 are PP) has seen some positives in the reintegration of students to more mainstream lessons. However, the behaviour of two students, both of whom are PP, has led to continued issues of FTE.

- Term 2 has seen the creation of a nurture group in Years 7&8, at its infancy, which will be called PAC Group. This will include off-site tuition from Manchester Giants Basketball and a teaching Farm. Alongside the external support, a new SENCO has been internally appointed and will teach these students in a central base. The make-up of this group is mainly focused on academic need (weakness), but is currently 100% PP.

Isolation has broken down as follows;Total Referrals Total PP Referrals Pupils Referred PP Referred 3+ Referrals 3+ PP Referred

Total 378 267 134 80 50 41Year 11 18 11 4 4Year 10 31 16 7 5Year 9 30 17 10 7Year 8 28 18 16 14Year 7 27 18 13 11

Term 3 PAC group (alternative provision) began and is starting to work with 6 young men. This group is 100% PP and is aimed at support for those whose

access to learning is fundamentally undermined by their current; reading age, working levels, behaviour and prior knowledge.

The new behaviour model initially saw an increase in referrals and FTE for PP students, which was expected. However, the overall aim is to increase their engagement in learning and improve the learning experience across the school.

Isolation figures for Term 3 are as follows.Pupils Referred PP Referred 3+ Referrals 3+ PP Referred

Year 11 7 2 0 0Year 10 72 37 6 3Year 9 117 57 17 9Year 8 135 93 16 10Year 7 80 57 12 9

Of 58 Fixed-term Exclusions in Term 3, 36 were for PP students. This, much like the Isolation figures above, shows that PP students are over-represented in both these measures. Current methods are not reducing this (though the behaviour policy will lead to this), but 2018-19 must see specific work undertaken with PP students in the new Year 9 and Year 10.

Specific Need (High Ability)

Specific Focus Barriers to Overcome Intended Outcome/Success Criteria Rationale (why)Narrowing the gap in progress for High Attaining PP students

- Parental support - Motivation - Cultural capital- Prior family experience of

Higher Education- Appropriate curriculum- Lack of challenge in lessons

Reduce the gap between high attaining PP and non-PP students. Lack of NEET students who are PP. Increased number of 7-9 grades for high attaining PP students

Prior results show that two of those groups to underperform are those seen as high attaining and PP students.

Developed Strategies & Actions Create a clear, and uniform, system for challenging High Ability students in lessons (Chilli system) Effective CEIAG work to give students access to college and university routes Access to post-16 providers and careers coaching Teacher able to clearly identify those students who are high attaining Offer intervention for high attaining PP students, voluntarily if not on the intervention list

How is it evidenced? Costs Person Monitoring1) Uniform challenge system created and added to learning resources 2) CIAG events planned, evaluated and student voice gained3) School calendar to show access to post-16 providers and student

voice for the impact 4) All staff to be aware of finding their high attaining students on

SIMS and Class Charts 5) Intervention list to show High Attaining students attendance to

sessions

£500 per annum £17,811 and £1,500£21,440.23

£500

JH – and SLT in drop-ins HP, JL and Careers TeamHP, JL and Careers Team

PT

PT

Evaluation of ImpactTerm 1

- Chilli system has been started, and delivered during internal CPD (INSET). However, this has not been taken on across the school and use has been limited.

- ClassCharts has been made available to inform staff of their ‘More Able’ cohort and to allow staff to see those who are also PP. - No coaching programme has been brought in for the Most Able who are also PP. Term 2 must see this begin, with staff coaching resources and

CPD on how to coach.- CIAG events in term 1 have seen Careers Fair – Year 10 (174 students, 104 non-PP and 70 PP) Careers Fair – Year 11 (165 students, 95 non-PP and 70 PP) Inspire to Aspire: Year 8 (7 students, 6 PP) Year 9 (8 students, 3 PP) Year 11 Interviews (165 students, 95 non-PP and 70 PP) UCAS registration (all of Year 11) NCOP Assemblies (Years 7-9) NCOP Focus Groups in; Year 9 (21 students, 10 PP), Year 10 (6 students, 2 PP), and Year 11 (20 students, 6 PP).

Term 2

- The chilli system has been used, but has had very limited impact. QA has shown it is used in very few lessons and can be seen in few classrooms. CPD did not fully show how to stretch the ‘Most Able’, and did not support PP students in this cohort. Most Able PP support must be planned to be changed/improved during Term 3

- All students, PP included, has received UCAS and college support for higher education. - ClassCharts set-up and training has also ensured staff know how to find their students who are PP and Most Able, with CPD centred on how to

support and challenge such students led by AHT. - New horizontal Forms, for Term 3, have been created to ensure that Year 11 are now with Maths or English in the morning. PP students were

given preference to ensure that they were in the subject they most required (based on #12 prediction for the end of the year), even in Most Able groups.

- Easter intervention has not been restricted to simply those below in terms of predictions. PP Most Able students have been targeted in MFL and Science with sessions aimed at preparation for speaking exams and Triple Science (Physics and Biology).

Term 3

- PP support moved away from systems set up by JH (mentors and chilli system) to specific interventions for Year 11. Form groups set aside for

Maths and English had specific higher-ability classes with a large proportion of PP students. - NCOP sessions on revision and positive mind-set were conducted on a school-day with only Year 11 present. 48% of PP students attended. - Attendance to intervention for PP Most-able was excellent. - Though overall progress for the 17 PP High Prior Attainment students was only -0.71, this was hugely skewed by three students who were either

sitting exams at a different provision, or missed a number of exams. 5 members of this group made +1 progress or greater, with one young man securing seven grade 9s.

Teaching & Learning (Prestwich Way)

Specific Focus Barriers to Overcome Intended Outcome/Success Criteria Rationale (why)Create a Prestwich way to start lessons well, offer consistency and create a positive learning opportunity for all students (promoting progress for all, including PP students).

- Lack of progress in lessons - Inconsistency to lesson

structure, starts and tasks- Student punctuality - Staff buy-in- Equipment and parental

support in this

Students learning in a prepared manner with a quick and purposeful start. This will lead to an increased chance at progress. Reduction in late marks and detentions given Greater in-class progress.

PP students, will benefit from quality first teaching. Teachers use class intervention (phase 1)

Developed Strategies & Actions Staff Learning Community to work on creating a ‘Prestwich Way’ Faculty meetings to further improve the ‘Prestwich Way’ Send out the final version for faculties and teachers to use the ‘Prestwich Way’ in lessons Improve quality of Teaching and Learning to improve progress

How is it evidenced? Costs Person Monitoring1) Evaluation of Learning Community and PAD sessions 2) Faculty responses via email to refine the ‘Prestwich Way’3) Lesson drop-ins and observations to see the use of this

NSNSNS, SLT and RST

Evaluation of ImpactTerm 1

- ‘Prestwich Way’ was launched in Learning Community, with initial ideas shared with all staff. This aimed to create a structured start to lesson (and learning methodology) to support PP students who may struggle to access lessons due to varied systems.

- Faculty meetings in October were used to allow teams to improve, critique and cut-down the structure. - Final version was agreed and sent out for use by all staff. - Lesson drop-ins this term have seen inconsistent use of the ‘Prestwich Way’. Staff meeting students on the door and setting ‘do now’ activities

have been inconsistent. Term 2 will see an increase in the QA of lessons and having staff greet/plan ‘do now’ more frequently.

Term 2- QA has increased during HT2 with DHT for T&L and the AHT for Progress observing increased lesson numbers. PP support has been focused on

increasing; ‘The Prestwich Way’, ‘Meet, seat and greet’ and ‘Do-Now’. Observations have found a lack of greeting on the door, but an increase in ‘Do-Now’ activities.

- SLT and Rowan Trust have led staff through a consistent SOW structure to aid student learning and progress. Consistency for PP students should support their improved learning. Future SOW will facilitate this.

- Supporting PP students, and the link with parents, has been made a focus. This had led to the creation of ‘horizontal’ (Year Group) forms to

increase the link with the tutor, improve communication with their homes and raise standards of; equipment, attendance and punctuality. Each of these actions are noted as supporting PP students nationally.

Term 3

- Observations in the third term continued to show an increase in SoP such as ‘Try This’ and ‘Meet, Seat and Greet’. - However, SLT learning walks highlighted a wide range of practice and a number of areas (especially those with cover) lacking consistency. This

was further evidenced during the Section 8 Ofsted monitoring visit. - ‘The Prestwich Way’, which was intended to afford PP students structured lessons to improve learning, as reviewed in term 3 will be relaunched

with staff as ‘Greater Expectations on the September PAD day.

Teaching & Learning (Research/Sharing/Internal CPD)

Specific Focus Barriers to Overcome Intended Outcome/Success Criteria Rationale (why)Share research and T&L methods to support the learning of PP students and improve teacher’s understanding of how best to meet pupil needs.

- Staff awareness of PP students

- Time for idea sharing and PAD days

- Staff utilising these ideas in lessons

- Sharing best practice

PP results gap to be reduced and staff using methods to better support PP students

PP students in class will benefit from teaching strategies aimed at increasing their progress. EEF research and PIXL principles show that effective focus on PP students, and specific actions, can reduce the gap in attainment. +8 months: Meta-cognition and self-regulation (Sometimes known as ‘learning to learn’ approaches) aim to help learners think about their own learning more explicitly and understand how to repeat success.

Developed Strategies & Actions PAD sessions to highlight the numbers of PP students and their characteristics Sharing best practice in Learning Briefings and Learning Communities Check on strategies being utilised in lessons Learning to Learn strategies shared with staff and pupils

How is it evidenced? Costs Person Monitoring1) PAD session resources to be placed on the shared drive and

evaluations completed 2) Learning briefing resources to be shared, placed on the shared

drive and evaluations completed 3) Lesson observations, drop-ins and work scrutiny

£2000 NS

NS

SLT and RST

Evaluation of ImpactTerm 1

- PAD session was led by RJF and RE1 to highlight the number of PP students and their characteristics. Evaluations completed showed a mixed

response to the information and ideas. - Learning Briefings has not been conducted in specific reference to PP students. This will increase in Term 2 with a minimum of one per Half

Term.

Term 2- Year 10 and 11 have been placed on a fortnightly assembly rota with a foci including; self-esteem, belief, revision, positive mindset, and

intervention. This support is targeted at those PP students who may not have this support at home.- Staff CPD has run each half term of Term 2 on the topic of ‘Advantaging the Disadvantaged’. This has focused on; highlighting those requiring

support, specific means of support and definitions of supporting based on need, not simply their code. - QA sessions have shown an increased use of ClassCharts, BUGS as a question dissection method, and Walk-it-Talk-it Mocks.

Term 3- Year 10 and 11 assemblies continued on throughout Term 3, with Year 11 focusing on exam details, intervention and readiness, whereas Year 10

focused on positive mindset and methods of revision. - CPD and Learning Briefings continued on ‘Advantaging the Disadvantaged’. This has moved to; successful teaching methods with students, exam

support, whole-school actions, and literacy support. - Learning Walks have also shown a greater use of the methods endorsed such as BUGS and Walk-it-Talk-it Mocks.

Cultural Capital (Extra-Curricular, Enrichment and Events)

Specific Focus Barriers to Overcome Intended Outcome/Success Criteria Rationale (why)To ensure that PP students have access to school events, enrichment activities and extra-curricular session, both with and without cost implications.

- Tracking of students - Uptake by PP students - Cost- Staff organising - Transport

PP students will be just as likely to attend events (by tracking) and will increase their cultural capital.

- Trip attendance - Enrichment attendance - Event participation - Lesson equipment (Food

etc.)

Students cultural capital, understanding of the world and engagement in the school will improve the learning and, as such, progress.

Developed Strategies & Actions Create a specific fund in the PP budget to pay for part (or whole) of enrichment, trips, resources and events for PP students. Have staff apply to

this for funding. Track the attendance/engagement of PP students in trips and events Check the impact of events and enrichment Create a small budget for printing, to be used by teams to support PP students Budget for costs incurred for lesson resources to support PP students

How is it evidenced? Costs Person Monitoring1) Create and update the spreadsheet of trip funding/lesson

resources based on staff request 2) Enrichment, extra-curricular and trip attendance to be sent to PT

and checked for PP inclusion. 3) Student voice questionnaires to be used. 4) Create budgeted area for printing and add this to faculty budget.

Track through existing systems

£4000

£4000 in to faculty pots

PT and TB

PT and staff

PT and HPPT and TB

Evaluation of ImpactTerm 1

- No specific funds were requested for PP students in terms of their access to trips and enrichment opportunities.

- Staff have not yet been asked to highlight PP and non-PP attendance to school trips and enrichment. This will be an addition to PP tracking in future.

- A small budget was set aside for the access of staff to support the needs of PP students. Term 1 access saw:Date Activity Goods AmountMay-17 NCS Challenge NCS Challenge £30.00Jun-17 Uniform Shoes + tights £23.00Jul-17 Taxis Taxis for 1 month - Walkden to School (return) £144.50Jul-17 uniform Shoes - JT £17.05Jul-17 Uniform Shoes DPL purchase for student £18.00

Aug-17 PP SUPPLEMENT PP Supplement for Practical areas £500.00Oct-17 Uniform Bags, shoes, socks – W Family £55.08

Oct-17 Uniform Blazers – W Family £21.00Total Spend £808.63Remianing £3,191.37

Term 2- Subject areas have accessed the PP fund to support students in their further study and extra-curricular work. This has included Performing Arts

and MFL. - Revision resource packs have been provided for every Year 11 students (for equality), but has allowed the school to ensure PP students have a

range of simple and supportive resources to aid revision. - Future support will be offered (in Term 3) to help fund PP students with; revision resources for subjects, NCS, and Prefect trip.

Date Activity Goods AmountMay-17 NCS Challenge NCS Challenge £30.00Jun-17 Uniform Shoes + tights £23.00Jul-17 Taxis Taxis for 1 month - Walkden to School (return) £144.50Jul-17 uniform Shoes - JT £17.05Jul-17 Uniform Shoes DPL purchase for student £18.00

Aug-17 PP SUPPLEMENT PP Supplement for Practical areas £500.00Oct-17 Uniform Bags, shoes, socks – W Family £55.08Oct-17 Uniform Blazers – W Family £21.00

15/12/2017 Taxis Taxi prior to setting up of medical taxi through LA £126.1012/02/2018 MFL Contribution French and Spanish Revision Guides + Workbooks £300.0013/03/2018 London Trip London Trip Pupil premium subsidy £750.00 £1,984.73

Remianing £2,015.27

Term 3- A fund has been put in place to take PP students, on the new Year 11 Prefect Team, to London for a trip to Parliament. This has had to be pushed

to 2018-19 due to timings when Parliament can fit us in.

Cultural Capital (Coaching)

Specific Focus Barriers to Overcome Intended Outcome/Success Criteria Rationale (why)For key PP coaching students to have a coach, and coaching

- Correctly highlighting students

Students chosen for the coaching programme to make improvements

PP students may be less likely to have parental support for their

Date Activity Goods Amount

Jun-18 Accelerated Reader books Laburnham house books £77.76Jun-18 Prom Contribution for Prom for A Downes, S Doxey £48.00

May-18 Trip Subsidy for Barcelona trip 2018 £300.00May-18 Clothing Blazer for Awoods £13.95May-18 Taxi Travel for student to attend exams £75.30Jun-18 Badges Literacy peer reading £20.00Jul-18 Taxi Travel for B Booth, Umar £74.00

£609.01

sessions, to support them in their learning and progress.

- Staff willingness to coach- Time for coaching - Training on how to coach

well

in;- Engagement in school- Attendance to intervention- Results in comparison to

previous data points - Reduce the gap between PP

and non-PP students in results

education, support in aspiring to higher education or the day-to-day support in their school life. EEF research shows the positive impact of staff coaching for students on a 1-1 or small group structure.

Developed Strategies & Actions Choose a group of students in Year 11 who are on the PP list and tracking shows they may benefit from coaching Approach staff who would be positive and willing to coach students. Link these students to a coach. Train staff on how to coach and provide resources to support the process (coaching booklet etc.)

How is it evidenced? Costs Person Monitoring1) Group chosen and created from data tracking and 4 Matrix

(coaching list) 2) Link staff to students to create a coaching relationship on (coaching

list) 3) Run a training session for staff and provide resources. Coaches to

feedback on; training needs, resources, meetings held and their quality.

4) Track the effect of the programme on student results via data drops and 4 Matrix

£500 per annum PT

PT, JH and JL

PT

PT

Evaluation of ImpactTerm 1

- Coaching programme has not been launched in Term 1. Staffing issues have played a part in this. - Preparatory work has been completed with JH and PT creating a coaching booklet ready for Term 2. - Term 2 will see the creation of a PP coaching group to be worked on by; SLL, Associate Staff and Form Tutors. JH will also be running a ‘Most

Able’ coaching group, some of whom will be PP.

Term 2- A coaching website has been set up, via the staff intranet, to support PP and Most Able coachees. This has been created by AAHT. However, this

has not been well explained or publicised. - PP coachees were given to SLT members and Associate Staff based on those who were furthest from expected progress. - However a number of staff have since dropped out of coaching, citing time commitments and ability to meet with their coachee. This has hugely

hampered the support for Year 11 PP students. - The coaching website shows a lack of meeting with key students. However, a small number have had meetings regularly (with some staff) and

LAC/CYPIC students are being well coached by AHT lead. - Term 3 must see a relaunch of this programme for the 2018-19 cohort (current Year 10) and simplifying of the process. This may mean

scrapping, or hugely amending, the coaching website and using a smaller and committed staff group as coaches.

Term 3- Coaching was poorly executed by staff and did not meet the needs of our students. A small number did do so well, and were aided by support

from AHT. This must be continued in 2018-19, but with a greater level of training for staff, and a more specific group cohort.

Attendance & Punctuality (Tracking and intervention)

Specific Focus Barriers to Overcome Intended Outcome/Success Criteria Rationale (why)To increase the attendance and punctuality of PP students seen to

- Historic poor attendance and punctuality

The attendance and punctuality of the chosen PP group to increase

PP students in secondary state maintained school are three times

be below national, and school, targets

- Parental support- Accurate tracking- Transport, distance and

time-keeping- Internal truancy

over the remainder of 2017-18 based on prior results for the individual.

more likely to become persistent absentees than non PP students.

Students who are not attending school are less likely to meet their curriculum entitlement, so are less likely to make expected progress.

Developed Strategies & Actions Highlight those PP students who are below targeted attendance/punctuality Make students and parents aware of the issue and offer support to improve this Track this group effectively and continue parental contact, by need

How is it evidenced? Costs Person Monitoring

1) Half termly review documents of those PP students targeted to improve their attendance/punctuality

2) Statistics to track PP attendance at a student and group level (each half term

3) Tracking of parental meetings/communication regarding attendance issues

£15,102 and £23,000

£15,102 and £23,000

£35,940.87

AN and SM3

AN and SM3

House Teams

Evaluation of ImpactTerm 1

  Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 All Years

All93.13% 92.74% 93.01% 92.37% 94.27% 93.09%

Pupil Premium 89.65% 89.69% 91.05% 91.33% 92.57% 90.80%

Not Pupil Premium 96.22% 95.36% 94.62% 93.08% 95.54% 94.92%

Attendance for the first term shows clearly, in all year groups, that PP students attend less frequently than their non-PP counterparts. The gap reduces in KS4 to 3% or less, but is around 6% in Year 7 and Year 8. No year group, or key group, is at the target of 96%. Term 2 must see Attendance Officer highlight, and show actions, to tackle poor attendance at an early age. Focus must be on PP students in years 7 and 8.

EWO Referrals All PP Non-PP7 3 3 08 5 4 19 5 4 110 5 3 211 6 5 1

Pre-referral Meetings All PP Non-PP7 19 17 28 18 14 49 14 8 610 21 15 611 13 8 5

Penalty Notices All PP Non-PP7 24 21 38 19 14 59 17 9 810 20 10 10

11 14 11 3

All work from the EWO shows that welfare intervention is much more heavily targeted at PP students. Penalty notices in all year groups are at least twice as likely to be PP students, seven times as likely in Year 7. Pre-referral meetings are more evenly split between PP and non-PP, but this number is widening as it reaches actual referrals. Referrals are at least double that on non-PP for PP students. Term 2

- Work to specifically impact upon attendance and punctuality has suffered due to staffing issues. The on-site attendance officer has not effectively followed-up on specific PP students in terms of their poor attendance. Positive work was starting on punctuality, prior to the Associate staff member going on long-term absence. This has halted the follow-up on those PP students with consistent punctuality issues.

Attendance Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 All YearsAll 91.04% 91.83% 91.10% 92.43% 92.73% 91.82%Pupil Premium 87.12% 88.99% 89.13% 91.00% 90.29% 89.25%Not Pupil Premium 94.30% 94.16% 92.66% 93.40% 94.52% 93.80%

- In each year group, attendance for PP students is much lower than their non-PP counterparts. It is also interesting that this difference seems to dwindle as students move towards Year 11. On the return of the attendance officers, and the move to Year Leaders and Pastoral team, a focus must be placed on those with poor overall attendance and a specific focus on Year 7 PP students.

- As can be seen below, attendance has also decreased gradually each term for PP students, where it has fluctuated for non-PP. Efforts will be made to focus on those PP students to ensure they stay in attendance as the school year progresses.

Term 3

- Continued absence of the Associate Staff member has seen limited impact on the ability to target specific PP students in terms of their attendance.

- Half Term 5 saw 91.6% as a school, but 88.8% for PP. In Half Term 6, it was 90.5 and 88.5% for PP. - Overall, Term 3 attendance sat as follows:

Attendance Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 All YearsAll 91.58% 91.14% 91.12% 90.27% 47.83% 82.73%Pupil Premium 90% 90.55% 89.58% 87.08% 46.05% 80.69%Not Pupil Premium 92.82% 95.18% 92.29% 92.36% 49.14% 84.25%

The statistics for Year 11 (and as such overall) are impacted by the early finish for study leave. However, all year groups still showed lower figures for PP students than non-PP.

Funding Summary

Overview of Funding 2016-17 Sept 2017 (costs) Jan 2018 (costs) March 2018 (costs)Catch-up Premium Funding £16,182.00 16,182 16,182

Pupil Premium Funding £356,235.00 £356,235.00 £356,235.00

Total Funding £372,417.00 £372,417.00 £372,417.00