Letter from foundation office about Pupil Premuim

[peter5]

@Happydad,it is really sad and everyone should write to their MP and the Education Secretary about this . It cannot be right that a quota ,that was set up to help those who have been ''disadvantaged'' by circumstances they were born into ,is being manipulated by those who should be implementing the quota .
Children who scored high Should Not under any circumstances be included in the pupil premium quota ,those children did well despite their circumstances and should not be used to prevent students ,the government want to help, from gaining access .
This just shows the attitude of the governors of these schools to pupils on pupil premium ,they are basically treating those students as ''lepers'' ,saying that,we only want so many of you despite your score.

Very sad that every time there is a program or policy to help people in need in this country,someone comes up with a 'wise' idea of shifting the goal post in order to prevent the program working .Based on what I read on the website ,there is a probability that no one will get a place because of the Pupil Premium quota .

[rabbie burns]

Between 5 and 10 PP children would normally qualify this year at FW. From what we hear with a score of 200 needed all 36 PP places will be filled. Sorry generally agree with the sentiments expressed but it will help a small number of children. These are elitist schools by their very nature. Also they cannot manipulate their own system. They just set it up this way. This is not a government directive but a kef initiative.

[moseleymum]

Having read all the links i just wonder if the cutoff score for the 20% (or KEA 25%) PP places will actually be quite high, leaving a lot feeling a bit misled by the use of qualifying score terms etc. I suppose after the first year at least the figures will be available to inform people

So as it now stands, when parents applied for a place following the results in October, they were told of the "last score in" for each school, as of March 1st 2014 (the previous cohort).

For future parents, will they give two scores? Will it be the "last score in" for PP and non PP children?

As well as misleading parents who hope to gain a place on the PP scheme, the current system also makes some non PP feel that if their child is two or three points below the scores quoted, then they dont stand a chance and might not list the school at all. Given that the CHG score dropped a massive 8 points or so last year from the score quoted on March 1st, the Consortium really needs to look at how they can make the process as easy to understand as possible so parents aren't misled.

I wonder how many appeals this will lead to?

[rabbie burns]

Don't see what's misleading. It might be unfair to some or just a bad idea but it's clear. It's parents who are confused.
1. All PP pupils are listed in numerical order and offers are made from the top until the quota is filled or the qualifying score is reached.
2. All other children are listed in numerical order and offers are made from the top until all places have been allocated. There will be a cut off score for each cohort for each school and both can be quoted next year to help parents eg FW may have a PP cut off of say 207 and a standard cut off of say 228. Who knows if they will though.
What would you appeal about. Not understanding the system. That's no defence.

[moseleymum]

I personally would not appeal on such a basis as I understand the way it works, but I can see that parents who don't feel it is clear, would appeal. Yes it's the parents confusion and they wouldn't win the appeal but it would create a great deal of extra work which could have been avoided. Each year on this forum we have parents starting threads about appeals and those who understand the system know the appeal isn't likely to work, but it doesn't stop the appeal from being made.

Not all parents read this forum. There will be many confused or under the illusion their PP child has secured a place if they have reached the minimum cut off. I have explained the system repeatedly to friends who don't read this forum.

The cut off on March 1st isnt the final cut off but unless you read this forum and have learnt otherwise, you might think it is, and it could affect how you list the schools on the preference form.

[rabbie burns]

Fair point, it could have been explained to people more clearly. Perhaps they should have got me to do it. Maybe they suffer from my ailment - namely its clear to me why is it not clear to everyone. Then again as you noted most people avoid forums like this one !!

[peter5]

Reforms will also give state grammars access to an additional £900 in “pupil premium” funding – cash designed to raise standards among the poor – for every deprived child admitted.

And this

Under the Coalition’s national admissions code, schools are allowed to discriminate in favour of children who are eligible for free meals.

Using current criteria from the foundation website is there a way of the foundation knowing if any of their current students were on fsm in the previous six years to admission?

[um]

I posted the figures a month or so ago:

Having just looked up the 2013 tables via the DFE (2014 figures not collated yet), I was surprised at how few PP children attend the grammar schools currently.

If the KE schools make up 20% of the new cohort with PP children (25% for Aston) as is their intention, it will be quite a big change.

The current figures (whole school; those eligible for PP) are:

KECHB 6.7%
KECHG 9.8%
KEFW 5.7%
KE Handsworth Girls 12.5%
KE Aston 20.3%

Also for the schools which have not changed admissions policies to offer PP preference (not part of KE Foundation):

BV 11.6%
SCGS 11%
Handsworth Grammar 27.2%

[um]

I think it is unfair to suggest that the foundation are discriminating unfairly against PP children/treating them like lepers.

In fact, the opposite is true.

The foundation wish to increase the number of PP children in their schools and so are potentially willing to offer places to PP pupils who scored below the general cut-off score.

I hope that, at least, is clear.

Regarding confused parents, I concur absolutely.

I know parents who are educated professionals, yet I have had to talk to them for some time to explain this. Even though they were not eligible for PP, they believed that as their child exceeded the second score noted on the results letter, they would gain a place.

Undoubtedly there could be many hundreds of families in Birmingham who see that their child scored, say, 200, and are convinced that they have a KEFW place in the bag.
This is not the case....and will sadly lead to a lot of disappointment.

I do not envy the task that the foundation had in explaining this clearly but (in case anyone is reading this ) next year a copy of the website FAQs would be a great idea to include with the initial results letter, which was very thin on explanation.

[Guest55]

The whole school % will take some years to increase though won't it? Only the Year 7 cohort will be affected.

Schools have to spend the PP money on the students entitled to it and show its impact on them. So tracking will be scrutinised and the 'gaps' will need to close if they are to to attract an inspection.