Compact Termly Primary Headteacher Briefing

November 2012

Headline Performance Data 2012

78+ pts (including 6+ PSE & CLL)

Early Years Foundation Stage

↑ 5.3% in 2012

↑ 5% between 2008-2011

2% below national (2011)

Narrowing the gap indicator

% gap between median and mean of bottom 20%

Reduced by 1.0% in 2012 (having risen in 2011)

1.2% better than national (2011)

Early Years Foundation Stage

LEVEL 2+

Reading ↑ 0.4% to 89.3%Writing ↑ 0.8% to 84.1%Maths ↑ 0.5% to 91.2%Science ↑ 0.5% to 90.7%

Above national in all indicators (2011)

Key Stage 1

LEVEL 4+ English & Maths

↑ 5.6% in 2012 from 2011

↑ 4% between 2008-2011

In line with national (2011)

Key Stage 2

LEVEL 4+ English & Maths

LLE/NLE Supported schools ↑ 10.5%

Other schools ↑ 3.5%

Key Stage 2

FLOOR STANDARDS

2010: 8 schools below national floor standards(60% Level 4+ Eng and Maths, 87% two levels progress Eng and 86% Maths)

2011: 16 schools below national floor standards(60% Level 4+ Eng and Maths, 87% two levels progress Eng and 86% Maths)

2012: 0 schools below national floor standards(60% Level 4+ Eng and Maths, 92%* two levels progress Eng and 90%* Maths)

But… 25% of schools below both progress measures

Key Stage 2

Ofsted Inspections since September 2012

• 15 Inspections

• 9 Good

• 5 Requires Improvement

• 1 Special Measures

L&A/DF/1112b014edp

Children from Vulnerable Groups

This presentation will focus specifically on outcomes for:

- Children Looked After (and Children in Need)

- Traveller Children

- Children with English as an Additional Language

- Children eligible for Free School Meals

- Service Children

But first, a little background information….

Facts and Figures – The Somerset Context

108,782children and

young people living in Somerset(under 18)

67,166 Pupils on the School Roll(Jan 2012) 7,979 claiming

Free School Meals(Jan 2012)

4,481pupils classified as belonging to an ethnic group

other than White British(Jan 2012)

2,364 pupils do not haveEnglish as their First Language.Apart from English, Polish (749

pupils) & Portuguese (231 pupils) are the most commonly recorded

first language of school pupils(Jan 2012)

864 pupils have a SEN Statement.A further 11,967 have School Action or

School Action Plus (Jan 2012)

3,421 Children In Need (March 2012)

495 Looked After Children(March 2012)

282 Children subject of aChild Protection Plan (March 2012)

13,770 children (under 16) living in poverty (2010)

1,133 Service Children on School Roll (Jan 2012)

311 Looked After Childrenof Statutory School Age

(March 2012)

13,837 pupils in 3 mostdeprived deciles (based on

Experian data)(Jan 2012)

135 Children subject of aChild Protection Plan of

Statutory School Age (March 2012)

2,062 Children In Need ofStatutory School Age (March 2012)

Outcomes for Children Looked After

Children Looked After are currently funded through the National Pupil Premium and Somerset Funding for Children from Vulnerable Groups

What the evidence tells us:

• Lower than average attainment at the end of Key Stages 1, 2 and 4 (particularly at KS4).

• Good progress in Key Stage 2 outcomes.

• Disproportionally represented in lowest attaining schools.

• Lower than average identification on Gifted and Talented registers.

• Higher than average exclusions.

• Higher than average rates of offending.

• Placement stability / length of time in care closely correlated with academic attainment and exclusion rates.

• Increasing proportions identified with Special Educational Needs.

Outcomes for Children Looked After: KS2

Performance of CLA at Key Stage 2 (2010-2012)

66.766.7

75

66.7

50

66.766.7

33.3 33.3

81.2 81.686.7

80.8 80.284.7

75 74.179.7

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2010 2011 2012 (P) 2010 2011 2012 (P) 2010 2011 2012 (P)

KS2 English KS2 Maths KS2 English & Maths

Key Stage Threshold L4+

% p

up

ils a

chie

vin

g e

xpe

cte

d le

vels

Children Looked After All Pupils

50% 48%

40%

CLA National Outturn

Outcomes for Children in Need (KS2, 2011)

Performance of CiN at Key Stage 2 (2011)

51 4840

81.6 80.274.1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2011 2011 2011

KS2 English KS2 Maths KS2 English & Maths

Key Stage Threshold L4+

% p

up

ils a

chie

vin

g e

xpe

cte

d le

vels

CiN All Pupils

48% 49%

40%

CiN National Outturn

Outcomes for Gypsy Roma & Traveller Children

The Dedicated Schools Grant funding is designed to help schools improve the performance of ethnic minority pupils, including those of a Gypsy Roma & Irish Traveller background.

What the evidence tells us:

• The lowest achieving identified ethnic minority group at every Key Stage of education (taking into account high drop-out rates).

• High proportion claiming Free School Meals (53% in January 2012 School Census)

• Lowest school attendance profile of any minority ethnic group;

• High levels of permanent and fixed term exclusions – particularly for boys.

• Less likely to be identified as gifted or talented.

• National and local evidence suggest that by the end of Key Stage 4, less than half of Traveller young people remain in school.

• Low primary to secondary transfer rates.

• Vulnerable to bullying and prejudice.

• Good progress in FSP scores, possibly due to strong support over several years.

Outcomes for Gypsy Roma & Traveller Children

Performance of Gypsy/Roma Pupils at EYFSP & Key Stage 2 (2010-2012)

52.6

26.32019

26.131.6

57.9

26.3

63.2

33.3

54.6 57.262.6

81.2 81.686.7

80.8 80.284.7

75 74.179.7

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2010 2011 2012(P)

2010 2011 2012(P)

2010 2011 2012(P)

2010 2011 2012(P)

EYFS KS2 English KS2 Maths KS2 English & Maths

% p

upils

ach

eivi

ng e

xpec

ted

leve

ls

Gypsy/Roma All Pupils

25%

Gypsy/Roma National Outturn

What the evidence tells us:

• Numbers of C&YP from minority ethnic groups have nearly tripled over the last 9 years, rising at rate of about 300 more pupils per year

• EAL referrals to the LA were at their highest ever level last year (approx. 480)

• Research suggests that EAL learners take 5-7 years to attain English language fluency comparable to their peers, so additional needs remain for a long period.

• Lower than average attainment.

• Less likely to go to their first choice school on first admission.

• Less likely to be identified by schools as ‘Gifted and Talented’.

• Vulnerable to bullying and prejudice.

• A survey of schools’ uses of the grant allocated suggested that it is used to provide a wide range of important support for EAL learners; some schools thought that funding should be available beyond the first 2 years, depending on individual needs.

Outcomes for EAL Children

Somerset vulnerable group funding for children with EAL is allocated for 2 yrs through the Dedicated Schools Grant: 100% in the first year, 50% for second.

Referrals to EMAS

Number of Referrals to the Ethnic Minority Achievement Service

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012

Academic Years

Nu

mb

er

of

Ch

ild

ren

Outcomes for EAL Children: Key Stage 2

Performance of EAL Pupils at EYFSP & Key Stage 2 (2010-2012)

7069

50

8081

61

7775

6052.2

4135

62.6

86.7 84.775 74.1

79.780.280.881.681.2

57.254.6

0102030405060708090

100

2010 2011 2012(P)

2010 2011 2012(P)

2010 2011 2012(P)

2010 2011 2012(P)

EYFS KS2 English KS2 Maths KS2 English & Maths

% p

up

ils a

chie

vin

g e

xpe

cte

d le

vels

EAL All Pupils

79% 79%72%

47%

EAL National Outturn

Outcomes for Pupils claiming Free School Meals

What the evidence tells us:

• Lower than average attainment at the end of EYFSP, KS1, 2 and 4.

• Pupils eligible for FSM in Somerset do not perform as well as the same group of pupils nationally.

• Eligibility for Free School Meals is used as an indicator for deprivation.

• Children from less deprived areas of the county perform better than those from more deprived areas at the end of each Key Stage.

• The highest early achievers from deprived backgrounds are overtaken by lower achieving children from advantaged backgrounds by the age of 7.

• A pupil from a non-deprived background is more than twice as likely to go on to study at university than their deprived peers.

Funded via Pupil Premium: Introduced in April 2011 as a way to address the current underlying inequalities between children eligible for FSM and their wealthier peers by ensuring funding to tackle disadvantage reaches the pupils who need it most.

The Impact of deprivation: Early Years

Performance of Pupils eligible for Free School Meals at EYFSP (2010-2012)

3336.6 46.9

57 60.5 65

62.654.657.2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2010 2011 2012 (P)

EYFS

% p

upils

ach

ievi

ng e

xpec

ted

prog

ress

Eligible for FSM Not Eligible for FSM All PupilsFSM National Outturn

40%

59%

44%

62%

The Impact of deprivation: Key Stage 2

Performance of pupils eligible for Free School Meals at Key Stage 2 (2010-2012)

63 60.6

76.8

6461.3

72.7

54 51.4

65.384 84.4

88

83 82.7

86.3

76.7 77

81.6

81.2 81.686.7

80.8 80.284.7

75 74.179.7

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2010 2011 2012 (P) 2010 2011 2012 (P) 2010 2011 2012 (P)

KS2 English KS2 Maths KS2 English & Maths

Key Stage Threshold

% p

up

ils a

chie

vin

g e

xpe

cte

d p

rog

ress

Eligible for FSM Not Eligible for FSM All PupilsFSM National Outturn

67% 67%58%

85% 83% 78%

Outcomes for Service Children

What the evidence tells us:

• Children from service families perform above the County average of all pupils.

• More likely than their peers to attend a number of different schools – more mobile but still attain higher and achieve further.

• Lower attendance rates than their peers.

• Experience greater social and emotional pressures than their peers.

• Less likely to be eligible for Free School Meals.

• Generally live in less deprived areas.

• Less likely to have an identified Special Educational Need.

Service Premium: A premium has also been introduced for children whose parents are currently serving in the armed forces, designed to address the emotional and social wellbeing of these pupils.

Outcomes for Service Children

Performance of Service Children at Key Stage 2 (2010-2012)

88.8 91.4 90 87.985 85.7

81.2 81.686.7

80.8 80.284.7

75 74.179.7

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2010 2011 2012 (P) 2010 2011 2012 (P) 2010 2011 2012 (P)

KS2 English KS2 Maths KS2 English & Maths

Key Stage Threshold

% p

upi

ls a

chei

ving

exp

ect

ed

pro

gre

ss

Service Children All Pupils

Summary of Key Messages

Children Looked After attain less well than their peers. Key Stage 2 results are improving, but remain low at Key Stage 4.

Children in Need attain less well than their peers but broadly in line with national figures.

For Gypsy/Roma pupils: Key Stage 2 static; small improvement at Key Stage 4 – but this small cohort needs continued attention and focus.

EAL learners: significant increase in numbers of children. Results improving at Key Stage 4 but still some way to go.

Improvements in attainment for children eligible for Free School Meals, especially at Key Stage 2.

Children from service families continue to outperform their peers.

Generally vulnerable groups in Somerset do not achieve as well as their national counterparts, although there have been some improvements.