  
|
Posted By Christabel Shepherd,
29 March 2022
Updated: 25 March 2022
|
Christabel Shepherd, NACE Challenge and Curriculum Development Director, introduces the new NACE Essentials guide on this topic.
There is strong evidence that an educational equity gap exists across all phases of the English educational system and that the effects of disadvantage are cumulative, so that the gap tends to increase as children grow older, especially during secondary schooling.
Concerns about disadvantaged pupils have never been as acute as they are currently, nor felt as keenly following the coronavirus pandemic and related lockdowns. According to studies collated by the Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) in its online collection Best evidence on impact of Covid-19 on pupil attainment, primary pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds have experienced 0.5 months more learning loss in reading and 0.7 months more in mathematics compared to their non-disadvantaged peers. Secondary pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds experienced two months more learning loss in reading than their non-disadvantaged peers.
Information from the Education Policy Institute’s Annual Report (2020) points to the fact that the attainment gap between disadvantaged pupils and their peers has stopped closing for the first time in a decade. Disadvantaged pupils in England are 18.1 months of learning behind their peers by the time they finish their GCSEs – the same gap as five years ago. The gap at primary school increased for the first time since 2007 – which may signal that the gap is set to widen in the future.
The stalling of the gap occurred even before the Covid-19 pandemic had impacted the education system – as shown in reports commissioned for the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission (2014), briefings published by the DfE for school leaders (2015), and research from the Sutton Trust (2015 and 2018).
Despite this worrying picture over many years, the plight of disadvantaged more able pupils continues to have been largely overlooked by schools. This may be based on an assumption that disadvantaged more able pupils will “be fine” and the misconception that, compared to less academically able learners, their needs are not as important or urgent.
However, evidence shows that academically able pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds are most at risk of under-performing (Sutton Trust, 2018).
The DfE’s most recent guidance for school leaders on the use of the pupil premium (November 2021) demonstrates increased expectations in terms of the identification of the specific challenges facing disadvantaged learners, and the planning of focused, evidence-based approaches to address those challenges effectively. Although reference to more able disadvantaged learners has been made in previous iterations of the pupil premium guidance for schools, it is now far more explicit: these pupils should receive just as much focus as less academically able pupils.
This is a welcome change, which should help to narrow the widening gap between these learners and their non-disadvantaged peers, and address the “levelling up” agenda. Like any group of pupils, more able disadvantaged leaners have a right to have their needs met and it is our moral responsibility as educators to ensure that this is happening so that these young people have the same life chances as their peers.
This month NACE has published a new NACE Essentials guide on the topic “Pupil premium and the more able”. Based on an in-depth review of education research evidence and literature, the guide provides support for school leaders to ensure that their school’s pupil premium funding can be used to maximise the opportunities for, and the achievement of, disadvantaged more able pupils. The key factors in developing a culture which will support the development and implementation of an effective pupil premium strategy are explored, and a range of specific evidence-based approaches aimed at meeting the needs of more able disadvantaged learners are exemplified.
The guide is available free for all NACE member schools, along with the full NACE Essentials collection. Read now (login required).
Not yet a member? Join our mailing list to access our free sample resources.
Tags:
access
aspirations
disadvantage
enrichment
leadership
policy
pupil premium
school improvement
transition
underachievement
Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
|
|
Posted By Nettlesworth Primary School,
29 March 2022
Updated: 24 March 2022
|
Donna Lee, Headteacher and Inclusion Coordinator at NACE member and Challenge Award-accredited school Nettlesworth Primary shares the school’s approach to ensuring the pupil premium is used to full effect.
At Nettlesworth Primary, we are committed to ensuring the teaching and learning opportunities we provide meet the needs of all pupils, including those of our most disadvantaged pupils.
We ensure appropriate provision is made for pupils who belong to vulnerable groups, focusing on adequately assessing and addressing their needs. These pupils benefit from individualised programmes based on an accurate understanding of what support best suits each pupil. Through this we aim to accelerate progress and overcome barriers to learning so that these pupils achieve similar outcomes to their peers, and to diminish the difference between those entitled to pupil premium (PP) funding and those who are not.
We focus on high-quality teaching and effective deployment of staff to support disadvantaged children. Following the national lockdown prompted by Covid-19, it is even more imperative that pupils are supported within school to ensure that any gaps in their knowledge can be addressed quickly and effectively, ensuring they have all the tools necessary to make progress.
All staff in school have contributed to the evaluation of the strategy. This has allowed a whole-school overview to be created, and has focused the attention of staff on the needs of the pupil premium children in their classes, those with the lowest levels of engagement during the pandemic, and those with the greatest recovery needs when returning to school.
Here are 10 approaches that have been key to ensuring effective use of pupil premium funding for all learners in our school, including more able disadvantaged learners:
1. Maximising staff performance and development
Systems and processes such as performance management and coaching are utilised to maximise employee performance. Through tackling underperformance, this secures defined and measurable outcomes through best use of time and efficacy. Performance management is integral to school improvement planning. Staff actively participate in the objective setting and review process, receiving effective feedback to progress priorities by tackling underperformance, celebrating success and developing human resource capacity through distributive leadership of priorities such as pupil premium, sport premium, special educational needs, and more able provision.
We emphasise the importance of ‘quality teaching first’ and aim to provide a consistently high standard through monitoring performance and tailoring teaching. External evidence is used alongside knowledge of our pupils to support our pupil premium strategy.
2. Investing in developing all staff members
We believe that using PP funding for CPD to ensure staff have the skills and training to take on more specialist roles brings the biggest impact. Investing in the development of staff such as teaching assistants and early career teachers leads to a higher level of expertise within the organisation. The creative use of human resources, in partnership with networking schools on a reciprocal basis, enables the development of a culture of mutual reliance and collective buy-in between the More Able Leads – learning from and with each other for mutual benefit for more able learners. This results in improvements in leadership knowledge, skills and behaviours, and improved attainment at greater depth against national comparatives.
3. Regular reports at governor meetings
Regular reports and attendance at governor meetings to update on progress helps to secure this focus within the organisation. Designated pupil premium governors and school leaders continually monitor the progress of the pupil premium strategy, adapting approaches when appropriate.
4. Committing to inclusive, flexible provision for all
We seek to be an inclusive school in which the curriculum is sufficiently flexible to fully match the individual learning needs of all children. Adopting an inclusive environment for all areas of our curriculum is essential to develop the needs of all our children. Our staff ensure that appropriate provision is made for all groups of children who belong to vulnerable groups. Our school has a whole-school ethos of attainment for all and views each pupil as an individual.
5. Pupil premium strategy shared with all staff members
The headteacher, in liaison with the Pupil Premium Lead, compiled and wrote the pupil premium strategy and shared it with the whole staff. Members of staff offered appropriate amendments to ensure all areas of the desired outcomes were met. The pupil premium lead then wrote an action plan to ensure the desired outcomes are achieved. This was then shared with all staff during a staff meeting. The strategy is reviewed each term.
6. Regularly updated pupil premium records
All teachers have a pupil premium file that clearly highlights all appropriate information regarding disadvantaged children, including more able learners, within their class. All staff are responsible for collating evidence for each child and continuously updating their files. The Pupil Premium Lead and Inclusion Coordinator monitor the files half-termly. These are very much working documents and staff utilise them to ensure an inclusive provision for our pupil premium children. The Pupil Premium Lead and Inclusion Coordinator track the progress of each disadvantaged child and create a termly overview for each file.
7. Planning for maximum progress in an inclusive environment
Teachers strategically plan, pitch, differentiate and deliver all lessons to ensure maximum progress is achieved in an inclusive environment. First-hand experiences are offered during each topic where the children can develop knowledge and skills. When developing our pupil premium strategy we take into account teachers’ feedback on pupils’ levels of engagement and participation, and their understanding of any challenges that disadvantaged pupils are facing.
8. Appropriate use of intervention groups
The Pupil Premium Lead liaises with the Inclusion Lead to devise appropriate intervention groups to ensure progression to diminish the gap in learning. Intervention groups include: Phonics, Reading, Maths, Lego Therapy, Breakfast Club, Tuition, Coordination Programmes and Nurturing. Each teaching assistant maintains an intervention file as a working document. These files are monitored every two weeks, and the progress of the children discussed with development points offered. The Pupil Premium Lead and Inclusion Coordinator monitor the progress of the disadvantaged children within these intervention groups. The Pupil Premium Lead, in collaboration with the Intervention Lead, delivered CPD to teaching assistants who deliver interventions to pupil premium groups, concentrating on activities, methods of recording, and introduction of a website page dedicated to pupil premium.
9. Mental health first aid
We have a member of staff who continues to develop her role within school of mental health first aider for any children who may be feeling vulnerable or have any worries or emotional issues which need support and intervention. We also have a group of children who are trained as mental health peers to support other children in the school. Many of these trained children are our more able disadvantaged learners. Staff have participated in training on highlighting strengths in pupils’ work and providing opportunities to raise their self-esteem within the classroom.
10. Increasing participation in enrichment activities
We seek to enable pupils to engage in school life fully, including support on healthy lifestyles and resources to access learning. We want children to be involved in enrichment within school, including accessing after-school clubs, visits and overnight residential trips. It is important to make decisions based on an understanding of individual pupils’ needs. Pupil premium funding is used to supplement and/or enhance educational visits and experiences across year groups, and to further target wider identified curriculum resources for pupil premium children across a variety of curriculum areas in order to aid children’s understanding, knowledge and key skills of development.
Read more:
Tags:
access
aspirations
disadvantage
enrichment
leadership
policy
pupil premium
school improvement
underachievement
Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
|
|
Posted By Chris Yapp,
08 September 2021
|
NACE patron Dr Chris Yapp explains why he believes real change is needed to the assessment system, with potential benefits for learners at all stages of life and development.
Given the significant focus on assessment in education that has followed the two years of the pandemic so far, the question for me when thinking about the future is: “How radical a change is needed?”
Whether it’s abolishing GCSEs or changing grades from A-Z to 1-9, the real issue at the heart of the future system is whether the new system reflects the individual’s efforts, aspirations and capabilities better than the system I grew up with, still largely intact. Importantly, can the system be more inclusive and less stressful to teachers and students alike?
So, what do I want to replace 10 GCSEs and four A-levels with?
For reasons I won’t bore you with, my wife and I have used the pandemic to learn Portuguese on Duolingo. We now have a 304-day streak, unbroken. We have around 55,000 points and now we achieve 300 points a day from a slow start.
I don’t want to talk about the pedagogy behind Duolingo. I have some criticisms there, but I think there are some really interesting lessons on assessment and, above all, feedback.
The lessons are structured in levels around topics. There are tips for each section. A typical lesson takes around 10-15 minutes. At the end of each session points are given. After a number of topics, stories are opened. There are also timed lessons. Today we reached 74% of the course. We have found some topics harder than others. Each question has a discuss button and people can raise concerns and ask questions. Some phrases are ambiguous, or the English translation is tortuous. There are examples where there are multiple correct answers that generate debate. We find some of the discussions around Brazilian Portuguese particularly fascinating. There are leagues with relegation and promotion.
For children raised with gaming, the idea of levels and points comes naturally. Retrying a level until you get it right is part of the experience, not evidence of failure. So, instead of a Grade C, why not produce a system with 100,000 points available in 10 levels, with the ability to see areas of strength and weakness?
Importantly, the scoring follows stage, not age. Many parents are quite happy when their offspring are doing Grade 4 piano and Grade 2 violin at the same time. It is not evidence of failure that different skills develop at different paces for different children.
Why shouldn’t a child leave school with, say, five million points scattered across a wide-ranging curriculum?
Let me illustrate with some examples of how the assessment system could be adapted to support more personalised learning built around a child’s interest and capability.
Khalid is 12. His hobby is photography. He wants to understand colour better. He wants to do that now. Unfortunately, the physics curriculum covers that when he’s 13 and the art curriculum at 11. Here, his interests outside school could motivate his development across multiple subjects at a pace and direction of his choosing.
Amanda is 13. Her mother is Italian and they speak Italian at home. The school does not have an Italian teacher. If they did, she might get an “A”, but instead will get a “C” in French. Here her A grade may reflect less on the school than a C grade does. The school “fails” if she gets a C, but “succeeds” if she gets an A. Here, the rigidity of the curriculum and assessment models reflect neither the individual nor her teachers.
Hazel is 8 and a bookworm. She devours books and loves to talk about them, be they stories, science, geography or history. How does assessing her reading against a narrow range of books tied to specific topics demonstrate her strengths and interests? She is fascinated by space and is reading teenage books on the subject.
Every teacher I’ve met could tell me similar stories about the children they have taught.
I think it’s important also to think about what this might say about professional development of teachers.
Geoff teaches French. He speaks a little Spanish and has picked up some Greek on holidays. Using my Duolingo example above, why would it not be possible for him to develop language skills in other languages as part of his own development? It could be built around his personal responsibilities for family and leisure activities – again stage, not age. For the school, the ability to widen its language portfolio could be a valuable asset.
Similar models might help a chemistry teacher improve his understanding of, say, biology. Imagine a personal development plan where teachers agreed to 5,000 points a year of personal development, rather than 10 days, which may be difficult to manage and pressure of time may make ineffective.
None of this would be easy, or quick. But building assessment into the learning, rather than a bolt-on much later, could free teacher time to better use.
So many children are let down, in my opinion, by the current system that I will be disappointed if all we end up doing is replacing one set of exams by another with a rigid exam system and season. I’ve known children affected by divorce, hay fever, asthma and death of a parent, as just a few examples, whose grades did not reflect either their abilities or effort, or the ability and commitment of their teachers. Even worse, the month a child is born still has effects on grades at secondary school.
So, the real challenge is whether this would be more inclusive or not.
Here I can sit on both sides of that argument and remain undecided on how to optimise the system. My one observation is that from a young age, gaming is part of children’s lives across a wider social spectrum than is current societal expectation of schools. When a child gets stuck at Level 7, their friends will often help or share ideas. There is both competition and collaboration at work. Both are valuable adult skills.
Finally, the rich data from this approach could enhance the role of teachers as researchers and create a stronger culture of action research within education at school and college level. For me, this allows the creation of a record of achievement that allows for “partial” subjects, not just a few. A school visit to a museum, for instance, could have a quiz that is incorporated into the child’s records. After-school activities might also benefit from this approach. I visited a school some years ago that had an astronomy group. They were sharing topics and materials with other schools. That collaborative learning between teachers and schools was interesting to observe. Yet, there was limited recognition within the current system for that personal development.
A new year begins after two of the most difficult times any of us have experienced in our adult lives. Thank you all, for your effort and commitment.
Change is coming: let’s make it work for all learners, be they teachers or students.
Read more:
Tags:
access
assessment
collaboration
CPD
disadvantage
independent learning
leadership
lockdown
policy
school improvement
technology
underachievement
Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
|
|
Posted By Hilary Lowe,
17 January 2019
Updated: 22 December 2020
|
Following the recently published report Access to Advantage, NACE Education Adviser Hilary Lowe shares additional recommendations for schools seeking to ensure more able learners of all backgrounds, socioeconomic contexts and in all parts of the UK have access to the most competitive higher education pathways.
The recently published Sutton Trust report Access to Advantage returns to the issues raised in the 2011 report Degrees of Success, which looked at university acceptance rates and how they differ by school type and area, finding state school pupils were considerably less likely to go to top universities than those at independent or grammar schools.
This new report uses UCAS data to analyse university acceptance rates for the 2015-17 cohorts by school type and region, with findings showing little changed since the 2011 study. In the UK, whether an individual attends university, and the institution at which they study, remains highly influenced by socioeconomic background, school attended, and the part of the country they are from.
Access to Advantage puts forward recommendations for schools and universities to help close the gap in higher education participation rates.
For schools:
- All pupils should receive a guaranteed level of careers advice from professional impartial advisers. For those facing disadvantage – or who are at risk of failing to reach their potential – there should be further support available, including being supported to undertake and reflect upon academic enrichment activities for the personal statement. The ‘Careers Leaders’ in schools, established by the government’s Careers Strategy, should ensure that key messages are consistent across staff and based on up to date guidelines.
- Advice should happen earlier, and include guidance on subject options at A level. Many young people are not getting the right advice when it comes to A level options. Students need more support at an earlier age, that can help them to make an informed choice on their A-level choices. This should include advice on ‘facilitating subjects’, favoured by Russell Group universities.
For universities:
- Universities should make greater use of contextual data in their admissions process, to open-up access to students from less privileged backgrounds.
- There should be greater transparency from universities when communicating how contextual data is used, including the use of automated ‘contextual data checkers’.
- A geographic element should be included in future university access agreements, including a focus on peripheral areas.
- Universities should work to reassure students and families who may be reluctant to move substantial distances to university.
What more can schools do?
NACE endorses the report recommendations – many of which it already supports in practical ways through its professional development programmes and publications, such as the newly published NACE Essentials guide on careers education, information, advice and guidance (CEIAG) for more able learners (log in to our members’ site for access to the full Essentials range).
However, much needs to be in place – in and outside school – at the earliest stages of schooling to give all learners the best chances of reaching the destinations of which they are capable. Our recommendations for schools include:
- Make full use of the body of evidence on what works to improve learner outcomes, including what works for the most able learners. Join the NACE community for regularly updated updates, guidance, publications, professional development programmes and the latest relevant research from the only UK organisation with a specialist focus on more able learners.
- Ensure that subject choices and option and qualifications pathways allow optimal choices for learners. The new Ofsted framework will support schools in evaluating the “curriculum of opportunity” and this will be a focus for NACE in the coming months and at our national conference in June.
- Focus on aspiration raising and the development of social capital and wider learning experiences. NACE courses, resources and Challenge Award-accredited schools provide many examples of how this is being achieved and can be successfully achieved in all schools.
- Continue efforts to increase teacher supply/access in academic subjects where there are currently shortages and in the areas of the country most at risk.
Schools alone cannot alone solve the challenges of social inequality, but they do play a vital role in opening doors for all young people by providing high-quality learning experiences in and outside school, a challenging and broad curriculum, informed and inclusive advice and guidance, and inspiring role models and mentors.
For additional guidance and inspiration, log in to our members’ site for your free copy of the NACE Essentials guide to CEIAG for more able learners.
Tags:
access
aspirations
CEIAG
disadvantage
higher education
underachievement
Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
|
|
Posted By Stephen Parry-Jones,
04 December 2018
Updated: 22 December 2020
|
Stephen Parry-Jones, Seren Network hub coordinator for Rhondda Cynon Taf and Merthyr Tydfil, takes a look at the network’s successes to date and plans to extend its coverage…
The Seren Network arose from concerns expressed by Lord Murphy, the former Cabinet Minister, that numbers of Welsh undergraduates at Oxford had declined. Lord Murphy was then appointed Welsh Government Oxbridge Ambassador and asked to explore possible reasons; he produced his final report in 2014, which can be viewed on the Seren website.
I was one of 11 individuals, drawn from every Welsh local authority, who were charged with turning his suggestion into some sort of reality. The emphasis was to be on bringing academically gifted sixth-formers together in “hubs” and providing them with super-curricular activities, as well as the additional support and guidance that a strong Oxbridge application requires.
Increase in Oxbridge applications from Wales
Many extension classes, visits from HE outreach officials, and trips to universities later, I was both pleased and relieved that the first independent evaluation, in 2017, was positive, in particular that “Seren makes a positive contribution to raising aspirations, boosting confidence and encouraging students to think more ambitiously about their university choices.”
The numbers are still being crunched, but it was encouraging that UCAS reported a 6% increase in “October 15th” applications from Wales – and this from a smaller pool of 17-year-olds, and with only the three pilot hubs functioning. Cambridge in particular has reported an upturn in the number of applications from Wales and, more importantly, the number of offers made. Applications to Oxford have also increased, though we have still to crack the challenging entrance tests that applicants face.
We quickly began to see that Seren was not just about Oxbridge, but about high-tariff university courses in general, whether in Wales, the wider UK or beyond. In my own hub, which serves some of Wales’ most deprived regions, I have been delighted to see Seren students taking up places at the most competitive universities, with Bristol, Imperial, Manchester and Warwick proving very popular. One student from our first cycle also gained a place at Yale, and others are now determined to follow her.
Plans to extend Seren’s work to KS3 and 4
Of the evaluation’s recommendations, perhaps the most significant was the idea that Seren extend its work into Key Stages 3 and 4. This was something Seren hub coordinators and heads of sixth-form were already trying to do: we had very early on realised that remedial work post-16, focusing just on the sixth form, is simply too late. Ambitions often crystallise in Key Stage 3 and GCSE options, so critical for future pathways, are increasingly made in Year 8.
As with the hubs geared to sixth formers, work here will probably start with pilots, though existing hub coordinators are well placed to broker partnerships between schools, universities and organisations such as NACE and The Brilliant Club.
Local universities are also a supremely valuable resource, and Rhondda Cynon Taf has for several years organised an intensive day for its most academic Year 9 pupils at the University of South Wales. Subjects on offer have included philosophy, Mandarin, solving unusual maths problems, and Latin. Many of those attending had previously been unaware of the university’s existence, and were surprised to find they were able to cope with intellectual exercises of demanding nature. For some, it was the first time they had realised that they were “clever.”
Another crucial asset is local students at top-flight universities who are willing to talk to school pupils. Rhondda Cynon Taf has run an Oxbridge day for Year 10 pupils, featuring stimulating Q&A sessions with current undergraduates. We have now extended this to parents, and have been lucky to be able to call upon access and outreach fellows from both universities to talk to parents on a “cluster” basis. This has been particularly important in busting those Oxbridge myths which can do so much to deter able learners who are not from privileged backgrounds.
Our challenge now will be how we avoid diluting Seren’s offer without excluding those who might benefit – keeping in mind NACE’s core principles that ability is fluid, can be developed, and is closely linked to mindset.
After reading modern history at Oxford, Stephen Parry-Jones taught for 38 years. Apart from a five-year stint in a London direct grant grammar school, his career was spent in comprehensive schools in South Wales. He retired as a deputy head in 2015, and is now Seren hub coordinator for Rhondda Cynon Taf and Merthyr Tydfil education authorities.
Tags:
access
aspirations
CEIAG
collaboration
enrichment
higher education
partnerships
Wales
Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
|
|
Posted By Lewis Iwu,
06 September 2017
Updated: 08 April 2019
|
This month the Fair Education Alliance (FEA), a coalition of almost 90 organisations spanning business, education and the third sector, has published its third annual State of the Nation Report Card. In this blog post, FEA director Lewis Iwu outlines key priorities for UK government and schools, to ensure all young people are supported to fulfil their potential, regardless of their starting point in life.
Since the release of our last report card, the FEA has more than doubled in size, and we are proud to have welcomed organisations such as NACE that are doing great work to ensure that all children receive a world-class education.
As an alliance, we have set five ambitious Fair Education Impact Goals which, if achieved by 2022, would mean significant progress towards closing the gap between the most disadvantaged young people and their wealthier peers. These five goals are:
- Narrow the gap in literacy and numeracy at primary school;
- Narrow the gap in GCSE attainment at secondary school;
- Ensure young people develop key strengths, including character, wellbeing and mental health, to support high aspirations;
- Narrow the gap in the proportion of young people taking part in further education or employment-based training after finishing their GCSEs;
- Narrow the gap in university graduation, including from the 25% most selective universities.
Accelerated progress needed to close the gap
The year’s report finds that since last year there has been marginal progress made towards closing the gap between disadvantaged young people and their wealthier counterparts. For example, the gap in literacy and numeracy at primary level has narrowed from 8.4 months to 8.2 months, while the GCSE achievement gap has decreased from 13.1 months to 12.8 months.
However, the gap in permanent and fixed period exclusions remains stubbornly wide, and the gap in university entry has increased for the first time since 2010. On the current trajectory, we will not achieve the five Fair Education Impact Goals by 2022.
Inequality in education is still deeply entrenched in our country and our Report Card is a stark reminder of the scale of the challenge. As the UK seeks to reposition itself in the world, it becomes more crucial than ever that our young people are able to fulfil their potential irrespective of their parental background.
Five priorities for schools and government
We know that educational inequality is a complex issue to tackle – too complex for one institution or organisation to solve alone. But we believe that by combining the passion, talent and ideas of educationalists, charities and businesses, we can offer a strong collective voice that creates a lasting impact on young people’s lives.
In response to the findings, the members of the FEA have worked together to identify five key priorities:
- School funding: A commitment from the government that national spending should not decrease in real terms on a per pupil basis.
- Destinations and careers: Every primary and secondary school in England should have a designated and trained senior leader responsible for developing and delivering a whole-school approach to destinations.
- Avoiding an expansion in selective education: The government should continue to resist calls to expand selective education in the future.
- Measurement of social and emotional competencies: A framework of measures should be available to all schools in the UK to support their knowledge of the social and emotional competencies of their students.
- Early years: The government should commit to ensuring that every group setting serving the 30% most deprived areas in England is led by an early years teacher or equivalent by 2020.
We’re extremely proud that the Fair Education Alliance has provided the platform for such a diverse range of organisations to come together and collaborate on this joint report and the recommendations that stem from it. You can read the full report here.
Lewis Iwu is the director of the Fair Education Alliance, leading the coalition of 86 organisations. He was previously a campaigns adviser at corporate advisory firm Brunswick, where he specialised in education and social policy.
Tags:
access
campaigns
disadvantage
policy
research
Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
|
|
Posted By Colin Parker,
11 July 2017
Updated: 07 August 2019
|
Colin Parker, headteacher of King Edward VI Aston School, outlines the school’s inspiring approach to admitting and supporting more able learners from disadvantaged backgrounds.
At King Edward VI Aston School (Aston) we have one of the highest proportions of students coming from a disadvantaged background at any selective school in the country, with around 40% of Year 7 and 8 students receiving financial support.
This is partly because of location; the school is situated in one of the most economically deprived areas of Birmingham, in a region offering numerous selective schools for parents wary of sending their child to the inner city. But primarily it is because the school has given priority to admitting students from disadvantaged backgrounds. We are also fortunate in having a separate source of funding, to support students based on postcode rather than parental income.
Levelling the admission test playing field
A few years ago, the King Edward VI Foundation commissioned research indicating that social diversity was declining in its selective schools, and consequently put in place measures that would result in more students from disadvantaged backgrounds gaining places.
The first issue to consider was admission policy; from September 2015 Aston has given priority to admitting up to 25% of pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds. To make this a realistic proposition and go some way to levelling the admission test playing field, the school has set a qualifying score significantly lower than the score achieved in recent years by the last student to gain entry. Any student from a disadvantaged background achieving the qualifying score has a very good chance of securing a place.
Secondly, with the support of the Foundation, the school runs a familiarisation programme, working with primary schools who have a significant number of disadvantaged students. Parents and their sons are invited into the school, with the students undertaking work similar to that which they will encounter on the admissions test, including sitting a practice test paper.
Bridging economic, social and cultural gaps
So far, the increase in the number of students from a disadvantaged background has had no noticeable impact in academic terms. Evidence to date indicates that their academic progress is in line with, if not better than, non-disadvantaged students. We use most of our pupil premium funding to bridge the economic, social and cultural gaps, including a grant for participation in extracurricular activities.
It is also about expectations and language. At GCSE, we are talking about grades A*/A or above 7 and at A-level grades A*-B and then progressing to a high-tariff university. These expectations are relentlessly shared with the boys and their parents.
This is a whole-staff effort and a shared culture. At Aston, unlike many schools, we do not have a pupil premium champion; it is an expectation that this role will be played by all staff.
This all comes back to the reasons why we are in education. Our view is that the point of education is to transform lives, and that will happen when a student from a disadvantaged background gets into a high-tariff university and consequently on the path to securing professional employment. It will not only transform the life of the student, but also that of his family.
This blog post is based on an article first published in the summer 2017 edition of the NACE Insight newsletter, available for all NACE member schools. To view past editions of Insight, log in to the members’ area of the website.
Tags:
access
aspirations
CEIAG
collaboration
disadvantage
parents and carers
transition
Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
|
Print Page
Blog Home
All Blogs
RSS