Bingley Grammar School

Pupil Premium Spending Report – 2015/2016

Funding is allocated on a Financial Year basis (ie April to March).

The level of Pupil Premium provided for each eligible student for the last three years is as follows:


As has been indicated in previous reports, over the last two years we have put in place support mechanisms for students which have been intended to provide additional support to those who require it and in this way it was expected that where disadvantaged students were falling behind their peers they would be picked up in the additional support processes. Considerable additional funding was allocated to these initiatives to allow them to be put in place and the Pupil Premium funding provided a large contribution to this. In addition, Pupil Premium funding has also been used to provide specific support to individual students in order to remove their own particular barrier to learning (eg access to IT equipment or pastoral support).

In October 2014 in direct response to Pupil Premium results we conducted an extensive internal review of the school’s approach to Pupil Premium and how monies were spent and tracked, this has shown excellent dividends in both an academic and pastoral sense with an even greater focus on how funding was spent and the impact made.

In 2015/2016 we also commissioned an external review of the school’s approach to Pupil Premium and how monies were spent and the impact they had upon our students. The review was led by Tony Thornley and in the report the following strengths were highlighted -

  • The awareness of a wide range of staff about the performance of PP students, and of the need to prioritise strategies to support them is good. This is a result of effective work by the PP team leaders.
  • Colleagues’ moral commitment to tackling disadvantage was evident in many meetings.
  • The analysis of PP performance is improving rapidly. Attitude to Learning information is better as a result of tighter, clearer criteria and is well used. The ‘war room’ is excellent, especially the careful analysis and display of Y11 students’ Progress 8 positions.
  • Colleagues gave me good examples of additional opportunities being provided for PP students, for example homework opportunities provided by the Head of Year 9 and Science KS3 progress analysis and evaluation.
  • Simple practical strategies to remove barriers - for example through the provision of basic equipment, PE kit, materials for cooking - have effective and are making a difference.
  • There is some evidence of developments which have impacted on teaching and learning, for example identification of PP students on seating plans and, in some cases, prioritisation of marking.
  • Involvement of the parents of PP students has increased, for example post-16 and through contact with parents who do not attend parents’ evenings.
  • Leadership of the initiatives has been very good and has high status. I was impressed by the enthusiasm, the strength of the team, and the willingness to use funding to seed initiatives. Local autonomy has worked well where the ground is fertile.

Within the report the following aspects were highlighted as specific aspects to continue with:

  • Personal support, mentoring, coaching of PP students.
  • Removing barriers of resource and access.
  • Going the extra mile to meet with parents who might be reluctant or have difficulty in getting in to school.
  • Providing opportunities for PP students (and others) who may find it difficult to do homework at home to do it in school
  • Providing ongoing additional support for students who are struggling with a particular aspect of a subject. These sessions are most effective when they target specific issues, identify individuals who will benefit, are not seen as or used as ‘detention’, and extend beyond Year 11.
  • Current leadership style: enthusiasm, nurturing expertise, providing autonomy for development.

Areas to develop were:

  • Practical classroom strategies
    o Develop a staff ‘tool kit’ which gives practical strategies - not just to help PP students but for all underachievers. It might include advice on marking and assessment, seating, grouping, checking whole class understanding, deployment of LSAs, dealing with misconceptions, questioning etc
    o Consistent practical strategies across all subjects to improve literacy, oracy and, especially, exam technique
    o Increasing the consistency in approach across the HOY team for analysis, evaluation and intervention with students

With the review findings and previous analysis of:

  • Examination Data
  • Pastoral Data
  • Student Voice
  • Staff Voice
  • Q/A data

 We revisited our five set outcomes to be measured against by the end of 2016/2017 (Three year plan - 2014 - 2017)

1. PP funding is streamlined with outcomes clearly measured during the process Improved Tracking System – measured against:

  • Attainment/Progress
  • Achievement Points (Now conduct points)
  • Attendance
  • EWL

Allowing us to ensure our students are gaining the best possible experience and interventions are striking but consistent.

2. Pupil Premium students have a greater sense of aspiration and belonging to the school environment - measured against:

  • Attendance
  • EWL
  • Student Voice

3. Staff understand what Pupil Premium is and what they can do in the classroom - measured against:

  • Lesson planning
  • Staff Voice

4. Budget to be centrally controlled to ensure value for money (Gov/Finance Manager/Senior Leader) - measured against:

  • Pupil Premium Funding report
  • Governor minutes

5. Parents/students aware of their entitlement and the outcomes they can gain - measured against:

  • Staff/student voice

With this in mind we then addressed the key aspects of the review and put in place specific staffing and spending to meet these points, plus developed longer term plans to instigate change, with our results showing a positive impact upon the majority of these actions, this evidence can be found on the following pages.