Pupil Premium (Including COVID Recovery Grants)

Pupil Premium

Pupil premium strategy statement

This statement details our school’s use of pupil premium (and recovery premium, including the school-led tutoring grant for the 2021 to 2022 academic year) funding to help improve the attainment of our disadvantaged pupils.

It outlines our pupil premium strategy, how we intend to spend the funding in this academic year and the effect that last year’s spending of pupil premium had within our school.

School overview

Detail

Data

School name

St. John Vianney School

Number of pupils in school

203

Proportion (%) of pupil premium eligible pupils

25.6%

Academic year/years that our current pupil premium strategy plan covers (3 year plans are recommended)

2021-22

Date this statement was published

1st October, 2021

Date on which it will be reviewed

September, 2022

Statement authorised by

John Hardy

Pupil premium lead

John Hardy

Governor / Trustee lead

David Dring

Funding overview

Detail

Amount

Pupil premium funding allocation this academic year

£75,305.00

Early Premium

£4,007

Recovery premium funding allocation this academic year (at £145 for 58 eligible children)

£8,410.00

School-led Tutoring (75% being £6,480.00 allocated)

£8,640.00

Pupil premium funding carried forward from previous years

£14,160.00

Total budget for this academic year

If your school is an academy in a trust that pools this funding, state the amount available to your school this academic year

£110,522.00

Part A: Pupil premium strategy plan

Statement of intent

We intend that all children attain above their expected trajectory; ‘thrown above’ their peers, a drift back to expected attainment for disadvantaged children would still mean they achieve well and are not further disadvantaged in education. This reflects one of the foundational principles at St. John Vianney School & Children’s Centre: equity.

We have learnt that if practice is developed to ‘get it right’ for the most vulnerable: in learning for children with special educational needs and/or disabilities; in care for looked after children; and, in enrichment for children with limited cultural experiences, then our practice is well-suited to support children eligible for pupil premium. Therefore, the practice and programmes we have developed addresses the needs we have identified rather than any ‘label’ that has been attached to them.

We find that children attracting pupil premium fall into all the different groups we consider in school and as with all children, it is important to develop an individualised and personal programme, rather than follow a prescribed route. Thus, using their pupil premium entitlement, we are able to ensure the child has swift and easy access to whichever programmes may be supportive.

We also find that children entitled to pupil premium make more use of some elements of school life – maybe those ones they are not finding elsewhere – both valuing them more and accruing greater benefit than other children in the setting.

In care:

  • Listening Culture: time and opportunity is built into the day, such as filtering into classrooms before lessons start in the morning, and practitioners are accessible for conversations with children.
  • Family at School: all children belong to one of 30 small groups of about eight children led by the oldest a ‘hoofy’ (head of our family) which also includes an adult.
  • Leadership: peer mediation; school council, eco-warriors . . . children take responsibility for aspects of school life.
  • Gift: much effort and time is invested in finding gift in every child, by: providing opportunities that enhance the curriculum: identifying those with promise: and, encourage them with a mentored experience.
  • Out of school hours care: activities and opportunities for play and relaxation in a safe and secure environment with adults already known to the children.

In learning:

  • Interventions: NELI; precision teaching, phonics . . . are available to support children’s learning, by intervening quickly.
  • Enhanced speech & language provision: children have swift and easy access to therapeutic intervention within our setting.
  • Reading comprehension: fluency building through repeated reading; fluency into comprehension, focusing on reading for purpose; leading to reciprocal reading.
  • Collaborative learning: a structured approach to enable effective team problem solving.
  • Behaviour: practitioners provide support and challenge to children needing more than the general behaviour policy to become self-regulating.

In enrichment:

  • Wider opportunities: children in upper years learn to play instruments – glockenspiel, penny-whistle, ukulele – as part of a class ensemble.
  • Out of school hours learning activities: wider ranging sports and activities are offered for children, such as gardening, reading club, craft, multi-skills, games.
  • Educational visits: extra-curricular visits such as: ‘canvas classroom’ and outdoor adventurous activities; gallery visits; historical.
  • Parental engagement: our Tapestry platform, nursery recruits, handwriting champions . . . provide opportunities to involve parents and support them to be the ‘first teacher’ of their child.

We find that a large proportion of Parent Support Advisor (PSA) time is devoted to parents of children attracting pupil premium. The benefit for parents seems to be that not only is the initial reason for accessing the service resolved, but also, more importantly, the resulting relationship, similar to extended family, provides a shoulder to lean-on or even just a listening ear, for the future. For some parents it is comparable to having access to a ‘life-coach’ – maybe a role grandmothers used to play in the community.

Thus, for us equity does not mean that everyone is treated the same. Following Jesus, describing the pay received by the workers in the vineyard, for us equity means that everyone receives what they need rather than what they deserve. Thus, funding follows need.

Challenges

This details the key challenges to achievement that we have identified among our disadvantaged pupils.

Challenge number

Detail of challenge

1

Lost social learning: non-verbal in 2YP (10); not toilet-trained in Nursery (4); not attentive (unaware of turn-taking) in Reception (6); not adjusted to classroom norms in Y1 (4); not able to work in groups in Y2 (7); not independent leaners in Y3 (4); non-urgent learners in Y4 (3); not interdependent leaners in Y5 (6); non-collaboration in Y6 (5)

2

Reading for purpose (learning and/or enjoyment): unable to engage with the content of texts either to learn or for pleasure (8)

3

Writing: difficult to give meaningful response during remote learning and maintain social distance leading to maturity of writing not matching attainment in reading and maths (21 in Y3-6)

4

Maths: difficulties in identifying misconceptions and lack of repeated process practice due to remote learning, has resulted in underperformance against previous attainment (27 in Y1-6)

5

Handwriting: Presentation and/or fluency not matching quality of content (7)

6

Mental Health & Well-being: Suicide (or attempted) in family (5) is the tip of an iceberg of anxiety (7), stress (5) and depression (4).

Intended outcomes

This explains the outcomes we are aiming for by the end of our current strategy plan, and how we will measure whether they have been achieved.

Intended outcome

Success criteria

Re-establish cohortual norms

N: all toilet trained; communicating with peers

R: ‘attentive’ class; with language for learning

Y1: all respond to social cues

Y2: effective group work

Y3: independent learners

Y4: appreciative of urgency of tasks

Y5: leaners building on previous responses

Y6: collaborative learners

Choose and use books for self-defined purposes

95% of identified children able to engage with content of reading

Improved performance in writing

70-100% of identified children are at age expectation in our in-house writing tool, in line with defined parameters for their age.

Maths

Accelerated progress of identified children to match or better their previous age-standardised attainment

Handwriting

>80% of identified children from Y2 -6 to write accurately in cursive at 65 letters per minute, recognising fluency (speed and accuracy) improves reading/spelling age as well as readability & editability.

Create a supportive culture for mental health

Effective bereavement programme (Rainbows);

Access to family support with our parent support adviser;

Defined route to support with mental health in and beyond our setting;

Activity in this academic year

This details how we intend to spend our pupil premium (and recovery premium funding) this academic year to address the challenges listed above.

Teaching (for example, CPD, recruitment and retention)

Budgeted cost: £4,000.00 (RP) + £28,000.00 (PP)

Activity

Evidence that supports this approach

Challenge number(s) addressed

Training (CPD) & delivery (teaching) of collaborative learning approaches (Y4, 5 & 6)

EEF suggest a +5 months impact

1

Training (CPD) & delivery (teaching) of reading comprehension strategies

EEF suggest a +6 months impact

2

Training (CPD £1500) & delivery (teaching) of  IPEELL (Writing)

EEF suggest a +9 months impact

3

Effective teaching of and sustained practice in  handwriting

Following a Curee report: The role of handwriting in raising achievement suggests an increase in speed of 3-4 words per minute corresponds to an average increase in reading and spelling age of 3-4 months.

5

Improving social & emotional learning in primary schools

EEF suggest a +4 months impact

6

Targeted academic support (for example, tutoring, one-to-one support structured interventions)

Budgeted cost: £4,000.00 (RP) + £ 4,000.00 (EP) + £8,640.00 (SLT 100%) + £41.000.00(PP)

Activity

Evidence that supports this approach

Challenge number(s) addressed

Social Learning

EEF suggest a +3 months impact for NELI

1

Reciprocal reading

EEF suggest a +2 months impact

2

1:1 Tuition (Reading)

EEF suggest a +5 months impact

2

Phonics intervention

EEF suggest a +5 months impact

2

1:1 Tuition (Writing)

EEF suggest a +5 months impact

3

1:1 Tuition (Maths)

EEF suggest a +5 months impact

4

1st class @ number

EEF suggests at least +2 months impact

4

Handwriting intervention

Curee report (as cited above)

5

Wider strategies (for example, related to attendance, behaviour, wellbeing)

Budgeted cost: £ 20,000.00 (PP)

Activity

Evidence that supports this approach

Challenge number(s) addressed

Rainbows

 

5

Senior mental health lead

DfE accredited & funded programme

5

Working with parents to support children’s learning and/or emotional well-being (PSA)

EEF suggest a +3 months impact

5

 Total budgeted cost: £109,640.00

Part B: Review of outcomes in the previous academic year

Pupil premium strategy outcomes

This details the impact that our pupil premium activity had on pupils in the 2020 to 2021 academic year.

Last year marked the end of a previous pupil premium strategy plan, which due to the pandemic health emergency was significantly different in execution to our original intentions.

Desired Outcomes

Evaluation

To improve reading for enjoyment and breadth of interest and experience, by providing opportunities to share enjoyed texts, tell stories from their reading and enhance staff expertise so children recognise the multiple benefits of reading: pleasure, learning, immersion in other worlds, cultures, ideas. . .

During the disruption cause by the pandemic health emergency, in the light of home-schooling, we chose to invest in ‘recovering’ the learning of reading both in school and during remote-learning this year. This resulted in standardised-age assessments for all children achieving at or above expectation being in Reception 70%, in Y1 59%, in Y2 85%, in Y3 85%, in Y4 68%, in Y5 73% and in Y6 92%. [There is still much to be done to return to our normal attainments in reading, and the intention of ‘reading for purpose’ will be school intention in the coming year.]

To increase progress of children in Key Stage 1 by identifying those performing notably well in one strand but not in all subjects. By providing additional support and challenge to heighten expectations in the other aspect we aim to see a balanced picture of higher performance at the end of the key stage.

To encourage parental ‘belief’ that identified PP children ‘can’ outperform peers and should continue to excel in future.

Having provided additional targeted support and intervention while in school, moving to ‘partially open’ in January, resulted in support focusing on maintaining engagement and progress in learning and the ‘targetted’ approach was lost. [This intention will need to be revisited.]

Performance in age-standardised testing improved for 10 children eligible for PP while home-learning through remote education when there was no ‘influence’ from peers.

To increase the proportion of PP children achieving greater depth in Maths at the end of key stage 2 by improving the quality of teaching of higher order reasoning and problem solving. The EEF suggest that by improving practice, PP children disproportionately benefit in comparison to other children.

Using GL standardised-age assessments 4 out of the 6 children eligible for PP in Y6, achieved SAS above 110 in a progress test in Y6, even allowing for disruption during the pandemic, demonstrating the worth of providing 4 live lessons each day, again disproportionately benefiting our children eligible for PP.

Further to reading, we will continue to work on the strategy from last year to improve writing performance, by extending experiences of the world (by PP children attending additional educational visits with classes other than their own), in order to have something to write about (working with a ‘writing coach’ upon their return), with improvement being seen in writing assessment using school writing tool.

Due to disruption caused by the pandemic health emergency, in autumn term, we invested in writing by investigating the previous year’s core curriculum with all children, recognising the impact of home-schooling. Then during the remote-learning of Spring Term, we recognised the difficulty of responding to writing ‘in the moment’.  Returning in March and throughout the Summer Term maintaining social distance again impacted its teaching, resulting in the maturity of writing not matching attainment in reading and maths especially for children eligible for PP with 21 children identified in Y3-6. [This intention will be a focus for Teaching and Intervention in the coming year.]

Externally provided programmes

Please include the names of any non-DfE programmes that you purchased in the previous academic year. This will help the Department for Education identify which ones are popular in England

Programme

Provider

No external providers used last year.