This snapshot, taken on
10/08/2011
, shows web content acquired for preservation by The National Archives. External links, forms and search may not work in archived websites and contact details are likely to be out of date.
 
 
The UK Government Web Archive does not use cookies but some may be left in your browser from archived websites.

Tolworth Junior School

You can read key facts about Tolworth Junior School, its delegation of special educational needs (SEN) funding, the system it used and how it evaluated value for money (VfM).

Key facts

  • Number on roll – 349.
  • Percentage on free school meals (FSM) – 17.8 per cent.
  • Percentage of children identified as having SEN – 23 per cent (includes those attending additionally resourced provision).
  • Number of statements of SEN – 11 (includes those attending additionally resourced provision).
  • Percentage of children who made two or more levels of progress between Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2 (2007) – 87 per cent English and 77 per cent mathematics.
  • Number of permanent exclusions in the last three years – 0.
  • The school has additionally resourced provision for children with language and communication difficulties (included in the statistics above).

Delegation of SEN funding

The school governors and headteacher allocated the SEN budget based on the following factors, in order.

  • The provision or funding required by statements of SEN.
  • The provision or funding required to meet the needs of children attending the additionally resourced provision.
  • The provision or funding, using a provision map of identified needs within the school.

There was a clear link between identified needs, use of provision mapping and spending on individual children.

Their system

The school employed a business manager to analyse all of the data, including pupil tracking. A senior management team member was allocated to each year group, who worked closely with the business manager to make sure that staff deployment and interventions were effective. For example, the school identified that in 2007 those children at School Action were not making expected progress in a number of key areas. Targeted interventions and resources were allocated, including:

  • handwriting programmes in Key Stage 2
  • Wave 2 and 3 rapid reading programmes
  • developing emotional literacy through social stories.

Evaluating VfM

Outcomes were to be reviewed after one term, taking into account contexts such as the qualifications and experience of the allocated staff, what other interventions were going on in the classrooms or groups, and the motivation of the group.

The school operated a range of national initiatives, for example social and emotional aspects of learning (SEAL), Assessing Pupils’ Progress (APP) and Assessment for Learning (AfL), alongside a solution-focused approach to removing barriers to achievement. Children were prioritised for access to specialist clubs or activities. For example, they were assigned to ICT clubs where it was known or suspected that they may not have access to IT at home.

The school provision map included every intervention (Waves 1, 2 and 3) for every child in the school and data from individual pupil tracking and these were used to analyse the effectiveness of each intervention and to plan next steps.

Parents played an important role within the school. A parents’ group was established to work with the school on the disability equality duties and to provide support and training to other parents, particularly those of learners identified as having SEN. The parents' group approved documentation to make sure it was parent-friendly and the school worked with the parents to identify ‘good progress’.