Pupil premium strategy statement – Falcon Junior School
|
1. Summary information |
|||||
|
School |
Falcon Junior School |
||||
|
Academic Year |
2019 - 20 |
Total PP budget |
£78, 780 |
Date of most recent PP Review |
01/04/2019 |
|
Total number of pupils |
429 |
Number of pupils eligible for PP |
60 |
Date for next internal review of this strategy |
|
|
2. Current attainment |
|||||
|
Year 6 2018 Attainment |
Year 6 2018 Progress |
Whole School Attainment |
Whole School Progress |
Pupils not eligible for PP Progress National 2018 |
|
|
% achieving in reading, writing and maths |
46% |
61% |
|||
|
% making progress in reading |
69% |
0.6 |
77% |
-2 |
0.31 |
|
% making progress in writing |
62% |
-2.4 |
76% |
-2.5 |
0.24 |
|
% making progress in maths |
46% |
-1.7 |
77% |
-1.8 |
0.31 |
|
3. Barriers to future attainment (for pupils eligible for PP, including high ability) |
||
|
In-school barriers (issues to be addressed in school, such as poor oral language skills) |
||
|
A. |
Low levels of progress from Key Stage 1 to Key Stage 2 in Maths. |
|
|
B. |
Low levels of progress from Key Stage 1 to Key Stage 2 in Reading. |
|
|
C. |
Increase Computing provision in school to support Accelerated Reader. |
|
|
D. |
Levels of support in classroom need to be increased to raise attainment in reading, writing and maths. |
|
|
4. Desired outcomes |
||
|
Desired outcomes and how they will be measured |
Success criteria |
|
|
A. |
Increase in progress from KS1 – 2 in Maths measured by VA (national data) and internal progress data. |
Children make progress in line with national averages. |
|
B. |
Increase in progress from KS1 – 2 in Reading measured by VA (national data) and Star Reading Age progress (Internal data). |
Children make progress in line with national averages. Star Reading Scores show increasing rates of progress in reading age. |
|
C. |
Insufficient ICT Suite with little computing facility in classes. |
ICT capacity facilitates increased rates of progress. |
|
D. |
Restructure of support staff to facilitate increased levels of progress through effective feedback. |
Pupil progress data illustrates accelerated progress in all core subjects. |
|
5. Planned expenditure |
|||||
|
Financial year |
2019-20 |
||||
|
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? |
|
Increase the rates of |
Additional support for Pupil |
Education Endowment Foundation and |
Monthly meetings with HLTA to |
ES |
£9214 |
|
progress in Reading and |
Premium children through |
Sutton research on Feedback (highest |
review provision and through staff |
||
|
Mathematics from |
targeted HLTA support (1- |
impact on pupil progress (8+ Months)) and 1- |
meetings with teaching staff. |
||
|
individual starting points. |
2-1 and small group tuition) |
2-1 tutoring/small group work (+4/5 Months). |
Termly pupil progress meetings. |
||
|
Increase the rates of |
Purchase and implement |
Evidence from other schools indicates that |
Staff experienced in AR |
ES and GH |
Christmas 2019 |
|
progress in, and develop |
Accelerated Reading |
AR and dedicated reading time accelerates |
implementation to drive the initiative. |
£4000 |
|
|
a love for reading. |
across the school with |
progress and understanding for all learners. |
Timetabling and planning a term in |
||
|
dedicated, daily reading |
Dedicated reading time helps develop a love |
advance of implementation. |
|||
|
time. |
of reading. |
INSET for staff. |
|||
|
Total budgeted cost |
£13214 |
||||
|
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? |
|
Children receive |
Restructure of Teaching |
Education Endowment Foundation and |
Regular data drops (3 times a year). |
SW |
April 2020 |
|
feedback and |
Assistants to ensure each |
Sutton research on Feedback (highest |
Focussed Pupil Progress Meetings |
||
|
intervention at the point |
class has the same TA for |
impact on pupil progress (8+ Months)). |
with Teacher and TA. |
||
|
of curriculum delivery to |
18.25 hours a week. Nine |
SENCO meetings with TAs. |
|||
|
ensure maximum impact in reading, writing and maths |
hours a week funded by PP for intervention and feedback. |
||||
|
Total budgeted cost |
£46080 |
||||
|
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? |
|
Increase school |
Purchase 30 refurbished |
To support the school infrastructure for |
Discussions and research with ICT |
ES, SL and |
Autumn 2019 |
|
Computing capacity (to |
PCs and redistribute Media |
implementing Accelerated Reader and for |
Technician. |
JS. |
|
|
support the |
Suite PCs to classrooms to |
developing research, computing and |
Feedback from staff using ticketing |
||
|
implementation of |
increase capacity and |
independence skills |
system to identify issues and ensure |
||
|
Accelerated Reader) and develop learning for the 21st Century. |
support children’s learning |
they are rectified. |
|||
|
Total budgeted cost |
£17000 |
||||
|
6. Review of expenditure |
||||
|
Previous Financial Year |
2018-19 |
|||
|
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 (and whether you will continue with this approach) |
Cost |
|
Increase attainment and |
Employ a specialist |
Maths progress and attainment are improving |
The new academic year will see the maths sets being |
£30000 |
|
progress in maths. |
maths teacher to |
across the school. Specialist teacher has led |
dissolved. Evidence from EEF shows maths setting has a |
|
|
teach in all year |
INSET and parent meetings regarding maths and |
negative impact on progress, particularly for lower sets. |
||
|
groups and to enable |
calculation. PP and non-PP children have |
|||
|
smaller grouping through setting. |
benefitted as a result. |
|||
|
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 |
|
Nurture – children are |
Nurture sessions for |
Pupils well being increased through having time to |
Nurture to be expanded to run full time with a dedicated room |
£10000 |
|
well supported in their |
children taking place |
talk and a safe place to go. Non-PP children have |
available. Boxhall Profile to be expanded beyond Year |
|
|
social and emotional learning. |
every afternoon |
benefitted too. |
3.Nurture for All training needed to develop skills. |
|
|
Support within the |
Teachng Assistants in |
Pupils supported across a wide variety of lessons |
TA deployment across the school is rather confused at times; |
£20500 |
|
classroom increasing |
each classroom with |
and subjects, both PP and non PP leading to |
more specific time should be timetabled to enable this |
|
|
attainment and progress |
dedicated PP/small |
increasing skills and knowledge |
support to be realised fully. |
|
|
across the currriculum |
group time |
|||
