DfE finds that higher parental incomes buy better educational outcomes

[noblegiraffe]

In a piece of research that will surprise no one, it turns out that children of wealthier parents do better at school.

However, while it is obvious that PP students and especially FSM pupils perform particularly badly, pupils from below-median-income families perform lower than, but more in line with children from wealthier families than with PP pupils.

What the DfE really want to know in this consultation, however, is whether they should refer to below-median-income families who don't qualify for PP as 'Ordinary Working Families'.

consult.education.gov.uk/school-leadership-analysis-unit/analysing-family-circumstances-and-education-1/

Good to know that they are spending their time and effort focusing on the key issues in education at the moment.

This is also interesting:

https://nctl.blog.gov.uk/2015/01/21/pupil-premium-reviews-using-system-leaders/

He says this:

"This rigorous evaluation must be carried out within schools by the leadership team and governing body. It may also be beneficial – even if the school is doing quite well for pupil premium-eligible pupils – to commission an external review from time to time. Using system leaders like national leaders of education to provide an objective assessment can help you to ensure that the funding is making as much impact as possible.
The review
The purpose of a pupil premium review is to use an evidence-based approach to assess how much impact a school is making when spending its pupil premium, and how it might increase its effectiveness. When it comes to the pupil premium, all schools should be using proven intervention strategies rather than simply doing more of what they've always done. Trying something different which is known to be effective, rather than staying with well-established approaches that are comfortable, is a key principle in effective pupil premium use.
It’s important that the review be led by an experienced, independent system leader with a good track record in improving outcomes for disadvantaged pupils. That way you get a fresh, objective view from someone who really knows what works."

This from:

https://www.tscouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/PPR-guide-Spring-2016-refresh-FINAL-2-1.docx

"Effective schools also recognise that disadvantaged pupils are not a homogenous group and employ targeted approaches for groups or individuals facing particular barriers."

It seems that much of what I was talking about, regarding targeting approaches and evaluating interventions, is talked about here.

If schools widely engage in this type of review process, instead of going with staff's feelings of "what works" and arguing "they shouldn't expect to be able to reliably say 'this intervention was more cost effective than this one'."would make me feel much happier, quite frankly.

This discussion about PP is fascinating to me.

My experience tells me that schools are useless at targeting PP funding correctly.

My DS is adopted so gets PP - he has needed emotional support and counselling but the school won't offer it. What they have offered (and we have refused) is free places at school holiday clubs. Last year he was taken out of class one afternoon every week to do an additional literacy class. He was annoyed because it meant he missed a session of project work that he really enjoyed. When I asked what the extra literacy class was for I was told that it's because he's on the PP list. They have to improve the literacy of the PP children. My son was in the top set for English, is predicted to get greater depth in his SATs and easily passed his 11plus. He was bored in these extra sessions as they were covering really basic stuff.

When the junior school refused to continue the counselling that he had been getting at infants school he ended up having a complete meltdown and ended up having to have therapy through our post adoption support team.

Angels yeah, that is the type of practice that really makes my heart sink. I remember some of the insensitive and poorly targeted interventions for my DC, when he had a Statement of SEN.

The sorting out took up a lot of my own time and had a big emotional impact for me. So yes, I can be very tenacious. The thing is how tenacious can those people, whose children receive PP, who are already really going through the mill, perhaps coping with dire poverty and health issues, have the extra resources to effectively advocate for their child? This could easily lead to much worse outcomes, in itself.

Yy, Angels. In fact, does Pupil Premium Plus still exist? DD's head had no idea about the difference between PP (funding can be used for wider cohorts of students) and PPP (funding must be directed at individual children)

My experience tells me that schools are useless at targeting PP funding correctly

To be fair, your experience tells you that your school is useless at targeting PP funding correctly, which is completely different. Also actually it sounds like your infant school was using it well?

Both my DDs' Primary and Secondary seem to use their PP money well and sensibly.

But anecdote does not equal data.

Teen yes you are right about that. The Infant school was much better.

PP+ has just been absorbed into PP now. The school don't have to target it towards the adopted child but they do for children still in care. Adopted children's PP funding just get counted in with general PP fund.

My children's issues are not about lack of family money and and all about their poor early life experience.

Angels Mine too. We can pay for extras, we can't pay for expertise during school hours which is seamlessly integrated into their other schooling.

We can pay for extras, we can't pay for expertise during school hours which is seamlessly integrated into their other schooling.

So it seems very unfair, when some schools do not appear to have the expertise and their interventions are the opposite of seamless.

The Pupil Premium Review article, filled in form example and Guides, l linked to earlier today, would be very good for schools to engage with and implement, IMO, in order to adequately evaluate and promote best practice in this area.

Clarity - totally get where you are coming from with regards to emotional toll. I'm a SAHM with a great auppprtive husband and a very comfortable life but the emotional strain of dealing with the school leaves me exhausted. I walked out of my DD's parent teacher consultation in tears. I've been banging my head against the wall for two years trying to explain the difficulties she has learning her spellings and times tables. ( DD born drug dependant and really struggles even though we do loads of learning at home and have a tutor for her)

When I ask for support they tell me she is normal and make me feel like I am making a fuss about nothing. And then at the consultation I get the teacher doing a sympathetic head tilt as she breaks the news to me that DD is well below expectations. When she asked if there is a reason why she does so badly in her spelling tests I felt left me banging my head in the desk!

As a PP said , if this is the trouble I'm having , with my very comfortable home life and the ability to pay for private tutors , how are parents with chaotic and difficult lives supposed to cope?

Sorry - that should say that I felt like banging my head on the desk.

Yes, it shouldn't happen. I think there must be a severe lack of understanding on behalf of some teachers to get it this wrong. The power games, head tilts, in some case bare faced lies, shows they just are really not interested in, well, doing their job.

Thankfully, there are some good ones out there too.

Bugger, wrong thread.

I understand that some schools are crap at stuff and I'm sure that it's really frustrating, but that doesn't mean that all schools are crap at the same stuff, changes need time to bed in and for best practice to be disseminated. Schools are more usually in the job of teaching maths, English, science and so on, so obviously need to take advice on this sort of thing. PP is still very new, however, and I would hate to see it pulled or made more prescriptive just because it's going to take time. Unfortunately politicians are often all about the quick result, as if social injustice could be sorted so easily.

I think you might have meant to post that (last post) on this thread, noble

https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/2911234-If-you-work-for-the-NHS-or-are-a-teacher-Who-are-you-voting-for

X post.

Thanks clarity, good guess!

I would hate to see it pulled or made more prescriptive...

This is a very real possibility, noble, if PP interventions are badly targeted.

What did you think of the Pupil Premium Review material I posted earlier today? I think if schools were to engage with and implement this type of analysis and evaluation, it would promote best practise and ensure good quality interventions are effectively targeted to the needs of PP qualifying students.

No problem, noble, I read some of it earlier today.

Giraffe, minifingerz, Bertram et all, I think you will be getting your wish for private education to stop sooner than you thought, though not via government intervention.
Boarding schools will soon be charging £40,000 a year per child and year by year the fees will increase.
Fewer families each year can afford this so the pupils will be made up of a percentage of very rich British families, pupils from overseas and those on bursaries. Every year the number British children will decrease. Presumably the overseas parents are sending their sons and daughters for a British education - rather than to an international school - which it won't be if there are hardly any British children. So maybe the overseas parents will choose somewhere else.
That leaves the school with pupils on bursaries, but if there are fewer and fewer fee paying pupils, how will the schools provide bursaries?
Noble, do you object to overseas pupils being privately educated or just British ones?

Aren't boarding school fees already inaccessible to all except the very rich? It's not like they're increasing to £40,000 from £2.50 is it?

Well yes, noblegiraffe, but what I'm trying to say is that every year they get more expensive so each year there are fewer people able to afford them.
Eventually - quite soon - there won't be enough British people able to afford them so they will be almost all overseas students plus those on bursaries - as long as the schools can afford bursaries.
I would've thought you'd be delighted if private schools went out of business.

Why would they go out of business if they are stuffed with rich foreigners?

Aren't boarding school fees already inaccessible to all except the very rich? It's not like they're increasing to £40,000 from £2.50.

I think you're only partially correct. Some families choose to use very large fractions of their income to send their children to private schools. I know of a family on a gross income of around £90k (so not very rich) who send their only child to a boarding school that costs close to £30k per year. I know of a number of families on gross incomes of around £150k (so around 100k net) who send two children to boarding schools. Clearly for families like this an increase of £5k or £10k would make it impossible for them to afford the fees.

For my own family, even an increase of e.g. 20% on fees would make the difference between choosing private schools and not - although our (day school) fees cost only around 20% of our net income, so a 20% increase on fees would be fundable.