Pupil premium is funding to improve education outcomes for disadvantaged pupils in schools in England. Evidence shows that disadvantaged children generally face additional challenges in reaching their potential at school and often do not perform as well as other pupils.
Pupil premium strategy statement
This statement details our school’s use of pupil premium (and recovery premium for the 2022 to 2023 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 | Prince Bishops Primary |
Number of pupils in school | 223 |
Proportion (%) of pupil premium eligible pupils | 56% |
Academic year/years that our current pupil premium strategy plan covers (3 year plans are recommended) | 2021-2024 |
Date this statement was published | 5th September 2021 |
Date on which it will be reviewed | 1st September 2022, 2023, 2024 |
Statement authorised by | Lynn George |
Pupil premium lead | Lynn George |
Governor / Trustee lead | TBC |
Funding overview
Detail | Amount |
Pupil premium funding allocation this academic year | £128,040 |
Recovery premium funding allocation this academic year | £12,905 |
Pupil premium funding carried forward from previous years (enter £0 if not applicable) | £0 |
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 | £140,945 |
Pupil premium strategy plan
Statement of intent
For all children, including those eligible for Pupil Premium, we aim to provide high quality, enriching and inspiring learning opportunities to increase academic achievement, particularly in phonics and reading as well as supporting children to reach their full potential through an ambitious, broad and balanced curriculum. High-quality teaching is at the heart of our approach, with a focus on areas in which disadvantaged pupils require the most support. This is proven to have the greatest impact on closing the disadvantage attainment gap and at the same time will benefit the non-disadvantaged pupils in our school. We aim to ensure that all children eligible for Pupil Premium receive immediate and consistent support through pre and post teaching opportunities as well as targeted intervention, where needed. Our intention is that all pupils, irrespective of their background or the challenges they face, make good progress and achieve highly across all subject areas. The focus of our pupil premium strategy is to support disadvantaged pupils to achieve that goal, including progress for those who are already high attainers. We will also consider the challenges faced by vulnerable pupils, such as those who have a social worker and young carers. The activity we have outlined in this statement is also intended to support their needs, regardless of whether they meet the criteria for Pupil Premium. Our strategy is also integral to wider school plans for education recovery, notably in its targeted support through the National Tutoring Programme for pupils whose education has been worst affected. Our approach will be responsive to common challenges and individual needs, rooted in robust diagnostic assessment, not assumptions about the impact of disadvantage. The approaches we have adopted complement each other to help pupils excel. To ensure they are effective we will:
|
Challenges
This details the key challenges to achievement that we have identified among our disadvantaged pupils.
Challenge number | Detail of challenge |
1 | Our attendance data 2021-2022 indicates that attendance among disadvantaged pupils has been 4.2% lower than for non-disadvantaged pupils. 25% of disadvantaged pupils have been ‘persistently absent’ compared to 3.8% of their peers during that period.
|
2 | Low educational achievement in the community. The Office of National Statistics data tells us that educational achievement of adults in the area our school serves is among the lowest 8% in the country. This impacts on:
|
3 | Social and emotional difficulties. 80% of social and emotional referrals are disadvantaged children who have barriers to learning.
|
4 | Behaviour. Disadvantaged children are exposed to a high level of anti-social behaviour in the community. The Office for National Statistics data tells us that crime in the area surrounding our school is among the highest 7% in the country.
|
5 | Assessments, observations, and discussions with pupils suggest disadvantaged pupils generally have greater difficulties with phonics than their peers. This negatively impacts their development as readers.
|
6 | Assessments, observations, and discussions with pupils indicate underdeveloped oral language skills and vocabulary gaps among many disadvantaged pupils. These are evident from Reception through to KS2 and in general, are more prevalent among our disadvantaged pupils than their peers.
|
7 | Our observations and discussions with pupils and families have identified social and emotional issues for many pupils, notably due a lack of enrichment opportunities during school closure. These challenges particularly affect disadvantaged pupils, including their attainment.
|
8 | In 2019, no disadvantaged children could swim 25 meters at the end of key stage 2. Due to increased investment, this improved so that 70% of disadvantaged children could swim 25 meters before the school closed due to Covid in March 2020. Since then, pools have remained closed and we need to ensure that when they reopen, disadvantaged children catch up as quickly as possible.
|
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 |
Improved oral language skills and vocabulary among disadvantaged pupils. | Assessments and observations indicate significantly improved oral language among disadvantaged pupils. This is evident when triangulated with other sources of evidence, including engagement in lessons, book scrutiny and ongoing formative assessment.
|
Improved reading attainment among disadvantaged pupils. | KS2 reading outcomes in 2024/25 show that more than 95% of disadvantaged pupils met the expected standard.
|
Improved maths attainment for disadvantaged pupils at the end of KS2. | KS2 maths outcomes in 2024/25 show that more than 95% of disadvantaged pupils met the expected standard.
|
To achieve and sustain improved wellbeing for all pupils in our school, particularly our disadvantaged pupils. | Sustained high levels of wellbeing from 2024/25 demonstrated by:
a significant increase in participation in enrichment activities, particularly among disadvantaged pupils
|
To achieve and sustain improved attendance for all pupils, particularly our disadvantaged pupils. | Sustained high attendance from 2024/25 demonstrated by:
|
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.
Activity | Evidence that supports this approach | Challenge number(s) addressed |
Train staff and resource Read, Write, Inc. to secure stronger phonics teaching for all pupils.
| Phonics approaches have a strong evidence base that indicates a positive impact on the accuracy of word reading (though not necessarily comprehension), particularly for disadvantaged pupils: Phonics | Toolkit Strand | Education Endowment Foundation | EEF | 2, 5 |
Embed Reading Comprehension training and approaches using the Literary Curriculum programme.
| Reading comprehension strategies are high impact on average (+6 months). Alongside phonics it is a crucial component of early reading instruction.
| 2, 6 |
Enhancement of our maths teaching and curriculum planning in line with DfE and EEF guidance. We will fund teacher release time to embed key elements of guidance in school and to access resources and CPD (including Teaching for Mastery training).
| The DfE non-statutory guidance has been produced in conjunction with the National Centre for Excellence in the Teaching of Mathematics, drawing on evidence-based approaches: Maths_guidance_KS_1_and_2.pdf (publishing.service.gov.uk) The EEF guidance is based on a range of the best available evidence: | 2 |
Improve the quality of social and emotional (SEL) learning.
SEL approaches will be embedded into routine educational practices and supported by professional development and training for staff using the Jigsaw programme.
| There is extensive evidence associating childhood social and emotional skills with improved outcomes at school and in later life (e.g., improved academic performance, attitudes, behaviour and relationships with peers): EEF_Social_and_Emotional_Learning.pdf(educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk) | 3, 7 |
Teaching (for example, CPD, recruitment and retention)
Budgeted cost: £28,500
Activity | Evidence that supports this approach | Challenge number(s) addressed |
Phonics training and resources. | Phonics approaches have a strong evidence base indicating a positive impact on pupils, particularly from disadvantaged backgrounds. Targeted phonics interventions have been shown to be more effective when delivered as regular sessions over a period up to 12 weeks: Phonics | Toolkit Strand | Education Endowment Foundation | EEF
| 5 |
Reading Comprehension training and purchase of Literary Curriculum programme.
Accelerated Reader training and resources.
| Reading comprehension strategies are high impact on average (+6 months). Alongside phonics it is a crucial component of early reading instruction.
| 2, 6 |
Improve quality first teaching, group and individual instruction through whole staff evidence based pedagogy training. | The average impact of metacognition and self-regulation strategies is an additional seven months’ progress over the course of a year. On average, individualised instruction approaches have an impact of 4 months’ additional progress.
| 2 |
Training and purchase of the Jigsaw PSHE programme. | Improvements appear more likely when SEL approaches are embedded into routine educational practices and supported by professional development and training for staff. In addition, the implementation of the programme and the degree to which teachers are committed to the approach appear to be important.
| 3, 4 |
Targeted academic support (for example, tutoring, one-to-one support structured interventions)
Budgeted cost: £ 68,568
Activity | Evidence that supports this approach | Challenge number(s) addressed |
Additional phonics sessions targeted at disadvantaged pupils who require further phonics support | Phonics approaches have a strong evidence base indicating a positive impact on pupils, particularly from disadvantaged backgrounds. Targeted phonics interventions have been shown to be more effective when delivered as regular sessions over a period up to 12 weeks: Phonics | Toolkit Strand | Education Endowment Foundation | EEF
| 5 |
Engaging with the National Tutoring Programme to provide support for the children most impacted by the pandemic.
| Evidence indicates that one to one tuition can be effective, providing approximately five additional months’ progress on average.
| 2, 5 |
Speech and Language Intervention. | Approaches that focus on speaking, listening and a combination of the two all show positive impacts on attainment.
| 6 |
Structured Interventions and Maths and English. | Well-evidenced teaching assistant interventions can be targeted at pupils that require additional support and can help previously low attaining pupils overcome barriers to learning and ‘catch-up’ with previously higher attaining pupils.
| 2 |
Wider strategies (for example, related to attendance, behaviour, wellbeing)
Budgeted cost: £33,876
Activity | Evidence that supports this approach | Challenge number(s) addressed |
Training and allocation of time for staff to improve attendance and reduce persistent absenteeism.
| Embedding principles of good practice set out in the DfE’s Improving School Attendance advice. The DfE guidance has been informed by engagement with schools that have significantly reduced levels of absence and persistent absence. | 1 |
Behaviour interventions and implementation of the Zones of Regulation. | Both targeted interventions and universal approaches can have positive overall effects: https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education-evidence/teaching-learning-toolkit/mentoring
| 4, 7 |
Mental Health First Aid training and provision. | Evidence suggests that children from disadvantaged backgrounds have, on average, weaker SEL skills at all ages than their more affluent peers. These skills are likely to influence a range of outcomes for pupils: lower SEL skills are linked with poorer mental health and lower academic attainment.
| 7 |
Total budgeted cost: £130,946
Review of outcomes in 2022-23
Prince Bishops’ pupil premium grant allocation amount
Pupil Premium | 118638 |
Recovery Premium | 12,308 |
Total | 130,946 |
Impact of Strategy 2022-23
Attendance 2022-23
| PB Disadvantaged | PB Others | National Others |
% Absence | 7.9 | 7.4 | 7.2 |
The attendance of disadvantaged children was broadly in line with other children. However, attendance was a concern nationally and will need to continue to be a very high priority for disadvantaged children in 2023-24.
Early Years
| Prince Bishops | National | ||||
| All | Disadv | Others | All | Disadv | Others |
Cohort | 29 | 19 | 10 | - | - | - |
GLD | 65.5 | 58 | 80 | 65 | 52 | 72 |
There is an overall gap of 14% between disadvantaged children attending Prince Bishops and others nationally. However, the gap is significantly smaller than the gap between disadvantaged children and others nationally. Particular successes were in the areas of comprehension, word building and maths. We will continue to invest in provision to improve speaking, self-regulation and building relationships in the early years.
Y1 Phonics
| Prince Bishops | National | ||||
| All | Disadv | Others | All | Disadv | Others |
Cohort | 29 | 9 | 15 | - | - | - |
Met Standard | 86 | 82 | 88 | 79 | 67 | 83 |
Significant investment in phonics and early reading meant that 82% of disadvantaged children in Y1 met the expected standard in the phonics check. Only one child with SEND has gone into Y3 having not met the standard.
Key Stage 1
|
| Prince Bishops | National | ||||
|
| All | Disadv | Others | All | Disadv | Others |
Cohort |
| 30 | 12 | 18 | - | - | - |
Reading | % Exp+ | 83 | 83 | 83 | 67 | 54 | 73 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Writing | % Exp+ | 80 | 75 | 83 | 60 | 44 | 65 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Maths | % Exp+ | 86 | 92 | 92 | 70 | 56 | 75 |
Key Stage 2
SATs Results
|
| Prince Bishops | National | ||||
|
| All | Disadv | Others | All | Disadv | Others |
Cohort |
| 28 | 11 | 17 | - | - | - |
Reading | % AS+ | 50 | 45 | 83 | 73 | 60 | 78 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Writing | % Exp+ | 79 | 73 | 92 | 71 | 58 | 77 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
GPS | % AS+ | 71 | 55 | 82 | 72 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Maths | % AS+ | 71 | 64 | 92 | 73 | 59 | 79 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Nat Standard+ RWM | 50 | 36 | 53 | 60 | 44 | 66 | |
There are gaps between disadvantaged children and others at KS1. However, the gap is significantly smaller than the gap nationally. By the end of Key Stage 2, the proportions of disadvantaged children who achieved the expected standard are broadly in line with other children nationally.