Today’s poll: Should low achieving disadvantaged children get more pupil premium than high achieving but equally disadvantaged children?

Proposals are being considered for changes to pupil premium allocation that will mean high achieving disadvantaged children would receive less, with more going to low achieving disadvantaged children – good idea or not?

 

Should low achieving disadvantaged children get more pupil premium than high achieving but equally disadvantaged children?

 

Don’t forget you can sign up to receive our daily email bulletin every morning (around 7 am) with all the latest schools news stories. Your details will never be given to anyone else and you can unsubscribe at any stage. Just follow tnhis link

Trojan Horse schools 'employed teachers through secret clique and mosque'
Consultation starts on measures for taking over failing and coasting schools
Categories: Policy and Poll.

Comments

  1. natedtrust_marc

    SchoolsImprove no! The school should decide how to spend depending on the barriers pupils face. It’s more complex than C/D borderline.

  2. neilayates

    SchoolsImprove Money should be targeted at individual barriers to learning.Some non PPG kids need more money than socially deprived kids

  3. itisspeltright

    SchoolsImprove No. What happened to a culture of aspiration for ALL pupils? Wasn’t that what PP was designed for?

  4. neilayates

    SchoolsImprove In our school there is no gap between majority & PPG who aren’t SEN.However SEN kids massively underachieving in comparison

  5. natedtrust_marc

    SchoolsImprove Hi yes would be v pleased to do this – but can’t until the Thursday next week. Does that work for you?

  6. mrsminniemouse

    It’s nonsensical to separate children and teach them depending on what funding they receive. If schools received adequate funding in general we could ensure that there was sufficient support so that all children could have help removing their barriers to learning. Not just those that are eligible for FSM/ PPG or are diagnosed SEND. There are many other children with additional needs that don’t fit into either of these categories. Schools in areas where most families have adequate incomes still have children with difficulties and we still need enough funding to buy resources and pay for support staff. The disparity in funding is quite substantial between schools because so much funding is given to PPG.

  7. mrsminniemouse

    It’s nonsensical to separate children and teach them depending on what funding they receive. If schools received adequate funding in general we could ensure that there was sufficient support so that all children could have help removing their barriers to learning. Not just those that are eligible for FSM/ PPG or are diagnosed SEND. There are many other children with additional needs that don’t fit into either of these categories. Schools in areas where most families have adequate incomes still have children with difficulties and we still need enough funding to buy resources and pay for support staff. The disparity in funding is quite substantial between schools because so much funding is given to PPG.

  8. AmandaFriary

    Totally agree and understand your frustration. The thing the government fails to understand is that some SEND children will never meet the same attainment as their peers. Because of inclusion there are children with significant physical and developmental difficulties in mainstream schools. This is fantastic for many reasons but it is unfair and unrealistic to expect these children to reach the same standards of academic achievement as their non-SEND peers. To penalise teachers and schools who work very hard with such children is shameful. Not all children with SEND will reach high levels of academic success, but they may be happy and equipped with the life skills required to lead a fulfilling life. Isn’t that worth celebrating?

Let us know what you think...