Pupil Premium Strategy - 2024-25
Co-op Academy Woodslee Pupil Premium Strategy 2024-25
- Pupil premium strategy statement
This statement details our school’s use of pupil premium 2024 to 2025 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.
- Academy overview
Detail | Data |
Academy name | Co-op Academy Woodslee |
Number of pupils in academy | 262: nursery-Y6 226: reception- Y6 |
Proportion (%) of pupil premium eligible pupils | 44.6% |
Academic year/years that our current pupil premium strategy plan covers (3 year plans are recommended) | 20242027 |
Date this statement was published | December 2024 |
Date on which it will be reviewed | June 2025 |
Statement authorised by | Katy Bergman |
Pupil premium lead | Julia Haggett |
Governor / Trustee lead | Cheryl Walker |
Funding overview
Detail | Amount |
Pupil premium funding allocation this academic year | £ 146,565 (budget) |
Pupil premium funding carried forward from previous years (enter £0 if not applicable) | £ Nil |
Total budget for this academic year | £ 146,565 |
Part A: Pupil premium strategy plan
Statement of intent | |
Our intention is that all pupils, irrespective of their background or the challenges they face, make good progress and achieve high attainment 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 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 are disadvantaged or not. 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 academy. Implicit in the intended outcomes detailed below, is the intention that non-disadvantaged pupils’ attainment will be sustained and improved alongside progress for their disadvantaged peers. 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 | Attendance: Our attendance data over the last 3 years indicates that attendance among disadvantaged pupils has been 2-3% lower than for non-disadvantaged pupils. 32.3% of our disadvantaged pupils are persistently absent compared to 22.3% of their non-disadvantaged peers. Our assessments and observations indicated that absenteeism is negatively impacting disadvantaged pupils’ progress. |
2 | Oral Language and vocabulary gaps 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. |
3 | Reading Assessments, observations, and discussions with pupils suggest disadvantaged pupils generally have greater difficulties with reading than their peers. On entry to Reception class in the last 2 years, between 65-75% of our disadvantaged pupils arrive below age-related expectations compared to 40-50% of their non-disadvantaged peers. This gap remains significant to the end of KS2. Reading SAT 2024: All pupils at Expected: 84.6% Disadvantaged pupils who achieved Expected: 71% |
4 | Maths Internal and external assessments indicate that maths attainment among disadvantaged pupils is below that of non-disadvantaged pupils. On entry to Reception class in the last 2 years, between 60 - 70% of our disadvantaged pupils arrive below age-related expectations compared to 20-40% of other pupils. This gap remains steady to the end of KS2. Maths SAT 2024: All pupils who achieved Expected: 84.6% Disadvantaged who achieved Expected: 71% |
5 | Writing Internal and external assessments indicate that writing attainment among disadvantaged pupils is significantly below that of non-disadvantaged pupils. On entry to Reception class in the last 2 years, between 60-80% of our disadvantaged pupils arrive below age-related expectations compared to 40-50% of other pupils. This gap remains steady to the end of KS2. Writing SAT 2024: All pupils who achieved Expected: 50% Disadvantaged who achieved Expected: 65% |
5 | Supporting pupils’ social, emotional and behavioural needs According to the Income Deprivation Affecting Children Indices (2019) 45% of our pupils reside in 30% of the most deprived areas nationally. We have 42% pupils who reside in the 20% most deprived areas.Teacher referrals for support remain relatively high. 17 pupils (7%) of the whole school, 25% of children with SEND (all of whom are disadvantaged) currently require additional support with social and emotional needs, with 17 (all of whom are disadvantaged) receiving small group interventions. Our discussions, observations, behaviour and safeguarding data, and assessments have identified that these challenges affect more of our disadvantaged students than non-disadvantaged. |
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 |
To achieve and sustain improved attendance for all pupils, particularly our disadvantaged pupils. | Sustained high attendance by 2026/27 demonstrated by:
|
Improved oral language skills and vocabulary among disadvantaged pupils. | Assessments and observations indicate significantly improved oral language and vocabulary skills among disadvantaged pupils. This is evident when triangulated with other sources of evidence, including engagement in lessons, book looks and ongoing formative assessment. |
Improved reading attainment among disadvantaged pupils at the end of KS2 | KS2 Pupil Premium cohort to be within 10% of non-PP cohort for RWM EXP+ measures |
Improved maths attainment for disadvantaged pupils at the end of KS2. | KS2 Pupil Premium cohort to be within 10% of non-PP cohort for RWM EXP+ measures
|
Improved writing attainment for disadvantaged pupils at the end of KS2. | KS2 Pupil Premium cohort to be within 10% of non-PP cohort for RWM EXP+ measures |
To achieve and sustain improved wellbeing for all pupils in our school, particularly our disadvantaged pupils. | Sustained high levels of wellbeing by 2026/27 demonstrated by:
|
Activity in this academic year
This details how we intend to spend our pupil premium funding this academic year to address the challenges listed above.
Teaching (for example, CPD, recruitment and retention)
Budgeted cost | £ 73,283 |
Activity | Evidence that supports this approach | Challenge number(s) addressed |
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 meet with the Trust maths director. | 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: Mathematics_guidance: key stages 1_and 2 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: Mathematics_guidance: key stages 1_and 2 | |
Enhancement of our English teaching, specifically writing. We will fund teacher release time to embed key elements of guidance in school and to lead CPD for staff | This review explores the research literature relating to English. Its purpose is to identify factors that can contribute to high-quality curriculums, pedagogy, assessment and schools’ systems for managing the subject. The purpose of this review is set out more fully in the ‘Principles behind Ofsted’s research reviews and subject reports’. Ofsted Research and Analysis The EEF guidance is based on a range of the best available evidence: EEF guidance: /improving Literacy in KS2 | |
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. | 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): Improving_Social_and_Emotional_ Learning in Primary Schools | EEF |
Targeted academic support (for example, tutoring, one-to-one support structured interventions)
Budgeted cost | £36,641 |
Activity | Evidence that supports this approach | Challenge number(s) addressed |
One to one and small group tuition for pupils in need of additional support, delivered in addition to, and linked with, normal lessons. Tutoring will be implemented with the help of DfE’s guide: Tutoring: guidance for education settings | Tuition targeted at specific needs and knowledge gaps can be an effective method to support low attaining pupils or those falling behind: | |
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: | |
IDL for reading and writing Daily small group intervention led by TA | Research across 40 years shows that a multi sensory independent learning programme approach improves children’s reading and spelling, especially those who are dyslexic. | 3,6 |
Dynamo Maths Daily small group intervention led by TA | Case studies and evidence of the Dynamo Maths approach tell us that this approach has an impact and improves outcomes for SEN pupils. https://dynamomaths.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/CaseStudy-WorcestershireSchools.pdf | 3,6 |
Wider strategies (for example, related to attendance, behaviour, wellbeing)
Budgeted cost | £36,641 |
Activity | Evidence that supports this approach | Challenge number(s) addressed |
Whole staff training on behaviour management and anti-bullying approaches with the aim of developing our school ethos and improving behaviour across school. | Both targeted interventions and universal approaches can have positive overall effects: Behaviour interventions | Teaching and Learning Toolkit | EEF | |
Embedding principles of good practice set out in the DfE’s guidance on working together to improve school attendance. This will involve training and release time for staff to develop and implement new procedures to improve attendance. | The DfE guidance has been informed by engagement with schools that have significantly reduced levels of absence and persistent absence. | |
Martial arts can help reduce stress and anxiety by encouraging deep breathing, meditation, and mindfulness. | Karate will be timetabled for children from years 1-6, to achieve and sustain improved well being for pupils. | |
Enrichment opportunities | Parent surveys indicate that they cannot afford for their children to attend clubs or be part of a team due to cost and being time poor due to zero hour contracts and work commitments or because they are raising a young family. https://www.cmu.edu/news/stories/archives/2020/may/enrichment-programs-help-children-build-knowledge.html | 2,3,4,5 |
Drawing and Talking Therapy | Pupils who struggle to communicate their feelings beyond the Early Years have used this type of approach to understand their emotions and there has been impact of this as individuals from Y6 (2021-22) to discover and communicate emotions through a non-directed technique, setting it apart from existing solution-focused and cognitive-based therapies and interventions.https://www.primarytimes.co.uk/news/2016/09/drawing-and-talking-helps-teachers-tackle-children-s-mental-health-issues | 2 |
Total budgeted cost
Total budgeted cost | £ 91,665 |
Part B: Review of the previous academic year
Outcomes for disadvantaged pupils
Pupil premium strategy outcomes | |
We have analysed the performance of our school’s disadvantaged pupils during the previous academic year, drawing on national assessment data and our own internal summative and formative assessments. The data demonstrated that disadvantaged children did not do as well as non-disadvantaged children. The cohort consisted of 52% disadvantaged children. In Reading, 81% of all pupils achieved Exp+ while disadvantaged children achieved 71%. This represents a 10% gap between disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged. 48% of all pupils achieved greater depth in reading while disadvantaged achieved 21%. This represents a 27% gap. In maths, 81% of all pupils achieved Exp+ while disadvantaged children achieved 71%. This represents a 10% gap between disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged. GD standard TBC In writing, 62% of all pupils achieved Exp+ while disadvantaged children achieved 59%. This represents a 3% gap between disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged. No children in the cohort achieved greater depth. We have also drawn on school data and observations to assess wider issues impacting disadvantaged pupils' performance, including attendance, behaviour and wellbeing. Data analysis shows that disadvantaged children do not come to school as much as non-disadvantaged children. In the academic year 2023-24, pupil attendance was 93.5% and disadvantaged attendance was 91%. This demonstrates an attendance gap of 2.5% between disadvantaged and not disadvantaged children. This means that disadvantaged children had more lost learning than non-disadvantaged. When we analysed pupil behaviour, we discovered that disadvantaged children had more negative behaviour points than not-disadvantaged children. High profile behaviour was higher among the disadvantaged group compared to not-disadvantaged. This means that disadvantaged children needed more support with their behaviour than non-disadvantaged. Bespoke wellbeing interventions were accessed by more disadvantaged children than not-disadvantaged and more families accessed early help than not disadvantaged. This demonstrates that the well being and mental health of disadvantaged children is not as good as not disadvantaged children. Based on all the information above, the performance of our disadvantaged pupils did not meet expectations, and we are at present not on course to achieve the outcomes we set out to achieve by 2026/27, as stated in the Intended Outcomes section above. Our evaluation of the approaches delivered last academic year indicates that [school would highlight aspects of their strategy that their analysis found to be particularly effective/less effective during the previous academic year]. We have reviewed our strategy plan and made changes to how we intend to use some of our budget this academic year. The Further Information section below provides more details about our planning, implementation, and evaluation processes. *Comparison to PP nationally be added following validation in November 2023 |
Pupil Premium Strategy Statement |