Ofsted warns poor pupils losing out on 'premium' funds
(about 5 hours later)
By Katherine Sellgren BBC News education reporter
More than half of schools given money to support poor pupils say it is having little or no impact on the way they provide for disadvantaged students.
Schools in England must do more to ensure funding from the pupil premium is targeted to the disadvantaged pupils it is intended for, Ofsted says.
Ofsted chief Sir Michael Wilshaw said it was a "real worry" if cash set aside in a government scheme was being diverted for "tarmacking playgrounds".
Chief inspector Sir Michael Wilshaw says heads must be able to demonstrate how the extra funding for low-income children is raising their attainment.
But schools minister David Laws said an "accountability mechanism" would help schools in England target the money.
The cash - £600 per pupil this academic year - is a flagship coalition policy.
The pupil premium is a key coalition policy, initiated by the Lib Dems.
Sir Michael also warns bright pupils are being failed by mixed ability classes and early entry for GCSEs.
Under the scheme, schools in disadvantaged areas in England are allotted £600 per head to help give extra support to poorer children.
Of 117 head teachers surveyed, only 10%, all of whom led schools in deprived areas, said the extra cash from the pupil premium had "significantly" changed the way they worked, the schools watchdog found.
The Ofsted report, which surveyed and inspected nearly 300 schools, found that half the schools thought the pupil premium was having a positive impact on raising achievement, but few could provide evidence to back this up.
Half of the schools surveyed thought the pupil premium was having a positive impact on raising achievement, but few could provide evidence to back this up.
Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Sir Michael said: "We found that over 50% said that it was having either little of no impact on the way they organise and manage their schools in relation to the use of money on poor children.
Sir Michael said: "The big issue is that this money is for our poorest children to ensure that they achieve as well as others who come from more privileged backgrounds. It is simply not good enough for heads of schools to say that it is not changing policy.
"We find that surprising - this is a large chunk of public money."
"Schools have to look seriously at this - if the money is being subsumed into main budgets, as most of it is, then that's fine, as long as schools can demonstrate that this money is going to help the poorer youngsters to achieve what their richer colleagues can achieve."
Sir Michael said many schools used the extra funding to employ more teaching assistants, with the number of these rising from 80,00 in 2000 to 220,000 in 2011.
"It's rather worrying that the pupil premium is being used to appoint teaching assistants when we know they don't have the same impact as good teachers and good teaching."
A spokesman for the Department for Education said: "We have given schools the freedom to use the additional funding in innovative ways.
"However, it is vital they use it to boost results for the most disadvantaged pupils, drawing on the large amount of evidence on how to make the biggest difference."
High achievers
The chief inspector also criticised schools for their policy of entering children early for GCSE examinations, saying the very brightest were losing out on getting the top grades.
Data collated by Ofsted showed a sharp increase in early entries for maths and English GCSE over the past six years, with about a third of pupils sitting exams early.
In 2005 9,000 pupils took English GCSE early, rising to 241,000 in 2011. In 2005 24,000 took maths early, rising to 218,000 in 2011.
Sir Michael said that school league tables - where schools are measured by how many pupils achieve five A*-C GCSEs including maths and English - often provided a "perverse incentive" for heads to get as many children as possible achieving a C, rather than pushing high fliers to achieve top grades.
The watchdog found of those pupils who were the highest achievers at primary school (reaching Level 5 in national curriculum tests, known as Sats), just 37% (63,523) got a grade A or A* in English GCSE in 2011 after being entered early.
However, 49% (109,236) of these pupils scored an A or A* when they sat the exam at the standard time.
Similarly, in maths, 43% (57,303) of primary school high achievers got an A or A* when entered early compared with 54% (119,710) entered at the standard time.
Sir Michael said: "Early entry hurts the chances of the most able children getting the top grades of A*, A and B, which they need to progress to A-level and certainly to university.
"We will be critical of schools using early entry except where they are absolutely confident that youngsters are reaching their full potential. By full potential we mean A* and A actually if they are bright youngsters."
Publishing a report on how schools can improve their Ofsted rating, Sir Michael said schools should be wary of having low expectations of pupils, failing to track the progress of pupils sufficiently and "the curse of mixed ability classes" without skilled and targeted teaching.
"This is not a judgment on mixed ability as opposed to setting or streaming, it is saying where there are mixed ability classes unless there is differentiated teaching to groups of school children in the class, unless there are individual programmes of work, it doesn't work."
A spokesman for the Department for Education said: "Some pupils are being entered before they are ready, and 'banking' a C grade, but their performance at Key Stage 2 suggests that if they had continued to study the subject and taken the GCSE at the end of Year 11, they could have achieved a top grade."
Do you agree with the findings of the report? Are you a parent or teacher? Send us your comments and experiences using the form below.
