The Pupil Premium Toolkit: building impact from evidence [Toolkit: ICS3]
Submitting Institution
University of DurhamUnit of Assessment
EducationSummary Impact Type
EconomicResearch Subject Area(s)
Education: Curriculum and Pedagogy, Specialist Studies In Education
Summary of the impact
The Pupil Premium Toolkit is an evidence-based resource for schools in
England looking for
guidance on spending their premium, which is in turn a funding policy to
address the effects of
poverty on attainment. The continuously developing Toolkit, created by
researchers at Durham
University, provides a unique cost/benefit summary of the relative impact
of different teaching
approaches in schools. Independent research suggests it is now used by at
least 36% of school
leaders in England in determining their spending priorities for the Pupil
Premium and to review their
support for disadvantaged pupils. It has had a direct impact on the
Education Endowment
Foundation (EEF) and its funding strategy for the £200 million it will
spend over 15 years to reduce
inequalities in school outcomes. The EEF's approach to commissioning
research and evaluation is
explicitly based on this synthesis of research evidence. The Toolkit has
also directly influenced
Government spending on education and the policy decisions of governments
outside England. In
March 2013, the Toolkit was identified as a model for the `What Works'
network for social policy,
which will inform over £200 billion of Government spending.
Underpinning research
The Toolkit is a synthesis of research evidence from meta-analyses and
other quantitative studies
[R1; R3]. It aims to support schools in spending their resources,
especially their Pupil Premium
allocation, more thoughtfully and more effectively. The Pupil Premium will
account for an estimated
£6.25 billion of education spending between 2011 and 2015 so is a
significant element of
resourcing for disadvantaged pupils.
The contribution of the Toolkit is that it provides estimates of the
relative benefit of the impact of
different approaches on pupils' attainment, using effect size as a common
metric [R1; R2; R3]. In
addition it includes an estimate of the financial costs for each of the
different approaches. The
resulting findings about the relative cost/benefit of adopting different
educational approaches on
attainment in schools provides highly valued support to schools. The
initial research drew on data
from over 60 meta-analyses and systematic reviews of approaches and
interventions to improve
learning in schools. Clear criteria for selecting the meta-analyses have
been identified by the
authors so that comparable studies with quantitative evidence from
well-controlled experimental
studies are included [R3], which is a further distinctive feature.
The research insight provided by this synthesis is that many of the
approaches initially chosen by
schools are either ineffective, or unrealistic to implement, on the basis
of the initial levels of funding
made available to schools. It advises that some of the most popular uses
of the Pupil Premium,
such as appointing additional teachers or teaching assistants, are
unlikely, on average, to increase
pupils' attainment, based on the analysis of research findings. The
Toolkit identifies other
approaches, such as providing feedback, or developing pupils' skills in
planning, monitoring and
evaluating learning (meta-cognition), or interventions that have been
successful that teaching
assistants and others could be trained to carry out, which are all more
likely to be successful. It
recommends that schools use the information to inform their decision
making about the most
effective support they can provide for disadvantaged learners, and
encourages them to evaluate
whatever they select.
The Toolkit was produced from funding awarded by the Sutton Trust to a
team from Durham
(Higgins, Coe & Kokotsaki) to undertake a new synthesis of `Strategies
for Improving Learning'.
This research was undertaken between November 2010 and May 2011 and the
resulting Toolkit
was published in July 2011 [R1].
The research has been adopted by the EEF who have subsequently
commissioned Higgins and
Coe to extend and update the review annually [R3; S1; S2] for three years
(2012-14), and to use it
as a basis to develop a methodology for the comparative analysis of EEF
projects. The Toolkit is
now presented as a public website and called the Sutton Trust/EEF
Teaching and Learning Toolkit,
with an overall synthesis of the findings, detailed information about each
of the areas covered,
references to the sources used and a summary of the synthesis of
quantitative evidence used to
estimate overall effects. It is routinely updated with new and emerging
evidence. Other links aim to
support take-up and implementation in schools [S1].
The findings in the Toolkit draw on conceptual work undertaken at Durham
for the ESRC-funded
Researcher Development Initiative (RDI) `Training in the Quantitative
Synthesis of Intervention
Research Findings in Education and Social Sciences' (April 2008 -
March 2011). An extensive
database of educational meta-analyses was produced for this project and
enabled the preliminary
analysis of effect sizes for the Sutton Trust.
Higgins and Coe are Professors in the School of Education, with Coe also
the Director of the
Centre for Evaluation and Monitoring (CEM). Coe has worked at Durham since
1996, Higgins since
2006. Kokotsaki is a lecturer in the School of Education and a researcher
in CEM.
References to the research
R1. Higgins, S., Kokotsaki, D. & Coe, R. (2011) Toolkit of
Strategies to Improve Learning:
Summary for Schools Spending the Pupil Premium and Technical Appendices.
London: Sutton
Trust.
The summary for schools sets out the aims of the Toolkit and the key
findings with detailed
technical appendices setting out the rationale and methodology for the
analysis.
R2. Higgins, S. (2013) Self regulation and learning: evidence from
meta-analysis and from
classrooms. In D. Whitebread, N. Mercer, C. Howe & A. Tolmie (Eds.), Self-regulation
and
dialogue in primary classrooms. British Journal of Educational
Psychology Monograph Series
II: Psychological Aspects of Education — Current Trends: Number 10. Pp
111-126 Leicester:
British Psychological Society.
This paper sets out the case for the relative benefit of meta-cognitive
and self-regulatory
approaches compared with other approaches, drawing on evidence from the
Toolkit. The
paper is based on an invited keynote address to the British Journal of
Educational
Psychology Conference in Cambridge, 2nd May
2011.
R3. Higgins, S., Katsipataki, M., Kokotsaki, D., Coleman, R., Major,
L.E., & Coe, R. (2013). The
Sutton Trust-Education Endowment Foundation Teaching and Learning
Toolkit. London:
Education Endowment Foundation: http://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/toolkit/.
This is the third version of the Toolkit with additional entries,
further details of the review
and synthesis methodology and linked references to the research and
studies from which
the effect sizes are calculated. The underpinning approach has been
reviewed and
developed in response to peer review from the EEF's Evaluation Advisory
Group.
Details of the impact
Pupils in England from less affluent families do not achieve as well in
school as their more affluent
peers, particularly compared with other countries. In 2011, in recognition
of this, the Government
established a policy, the Pupil Premium, to target resource for these
pupils. However it is difficult
for schools to decide how to spend this additional resource effectively to
improve learning as there
is no simple link between more spending and better learning. It is this
challenge the Toolkit aims to
address.
Impact on the EEF: the impetus for impact from the Pupil Premium
Toolkit has been through the
work of the Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) and is an example of a
creative research
partnership between Durham University and an influential educational
organisation. Established in
2011, the EEF is an independent grant-making charity dedicated to raising
the attainment of
disadvantaged pupils in English primary and secondary schools by
challenging educational
disadvantage, sharing evidence and finding out what is effective in
improving pupils' attainment
[S1]. The EEF has adopted the Toolkit to inform their decisions about
project funding and about
evaluation and are committed to developing and extending the Toolkit with
the emerging findings
and evidence from their own research [S2], exemplifying co-production of
research knowledge.
The Sutton Trust, one of the founding partners in the EEF, advocated the
adoption and
development of the Toolkit as a means to develop rigorous comparative
evidence about the impact
of different educational approaches on disadvantaged pupils in schools.
The School of Education
and CEM have worked in partnership with the Sutton Trust since 2008. EEF
was funded with
£135m from the Department for Education (DfE). With investment and
fundraising income, the EEF
intends to award over £200 million over the 15-year life of the
Foundation. The EEF's vision is to
break the link between family background and educational achievement,
ensuring that pupils from
all backgrounds have the opportunity to fulfil their aspirations and make
the most of their talents.
By the end of May 2013 it had funded 56 projects at a cost of £28.7
million, reaching about 1,800
primary and secondary schools and 300,000 pupils [S3]. Evidence in the
Toolkit informs decisions
about which projects the EEF funds and the type of evaluations
commissioned [S2, p 16; S4]. The
Foundation acknowledges the Toolkit as their "primary means of
disseminating knowledge of what
works in education" [S2, p. 19]. The success of the Pupil Premium Toolkit
has encouraged the
Sutton Trust to commission other similar projects, such as the `Sutton
Trust Access Toolkit' for
Higher Education.
Impact on national and local education policy: in March 2013, the
Cabinet Office announced
the creation of a `What Works' network for social policy, to inform
decision-making on £200 billion
of public spending [S3]. The EEF and Sutton Trust were designated the
national `What Works'
centre for schooling and the Toolkit forms the heart of this work [S3;
S4]. The Toolkit was cited as
an exemplary model of the presentation of clear, high-quality evidence
which the four new centres
(in crime, economic growth, ageing, and early intervention) should aim to
emulate [S3]. The Toolkit
has also had a direct influence on policy spending with £50M spent on
funding Summer Schools
for disadvantaged pupils in 2012 and another £50M committed for 2013. This
policy was
developed by the Deputy Prime Minister's Office who used the evidence in
the Toolkit to identify
the policy focus on summer school provision [S4]. Ofsted also cited the
evidence summarized in
the Toolkit as influencing their judgments about effective use of the
Pupil Premium [S5]. This has
already had a significant effect on schools as Ofsted have responsibility
for reporting on how
effectively schools are spending their Pupil Premium allocation. Since
2011, a significant number
of English Local Authorities have also endorsed the Toolkit. These include
Barnet, Bradford,
Bristol, Derby, East Sussex, Gloucestershire, Harringay, Kent,
Leicestershire, Medway,
Northumberland, Shropshire, Staffordshire, Suffolk, Wiltshire,
Wolverhampton and York, all linking
to the Toolkit through their websites and online support for schools [S6].
The Toolkit is also
recommended on the Welsh Government's `Learning Wales' website for
effective allocation of
funds from the Pupil Deprivation Grant and the Toolkit was reviewed by the
Research and
Information Service in a briefing for the Northern Ireland Assembly's
discussion of the Pupil
Premium in England.
Impact on schools: The most significant impact of the Toolkit has
been on schools. It has been
used voluntarily and directly by hundreds of schools to guide their
spending and their teaching
priorities when allocating Pupil Premium funds and informing parents about
their rationale. A
representative survey of schools commissioned by the Sutton Trust, and
undertaken by NFER in
2012, and repeated in 2013, asked schools about their priorities in
spending the Pupil Premium.
The report states [S7, p 10] that the "responses from 2013 about how
decisions are made about
approaches to adopt to improve pupil learning were very similar to those
given in 2012...Among
senior leaders there were three options which showed a change... The
option, reading the pupil
premium toolkit published by the Sutton Trust, ... saw an increase in
response among senior
leaders, from one in ten in 2012 (11%) to over a third in 2013 (36%)."
This level of take up in
schools is corroborated by the Evaluation of the Pupil Premium report by
Manchester and
Newcastle Universities for the Department for Education.
In 2012-13, the total Pupil Premium spending was £1.099 billion and
£1.875 billion in 2013-14. This
suggests that if 11% of senior leaders used the Toolkit to guide decision
making in 2012, it
influenced £120 million of spending in schools (11% of £1.099 bn), and
that if 36% of senior
leaders said they used the toolkit to guide spending in March 2013, it has
influenced the allocation
of about £675 million of school spending for 2013-14 (36% of £1.875 bn).
Google searching reveals at least 120 schools which have acknowledged on
their website the
contribution of the Sutton Trust/EEF Toolkit to their rationale for
spending the Pupil Premium and
how they have allocated the funds. Most of these websites describe how
their decisions for
allocating funding have been influenced by the Toolkit, both in terms of
identifying strategies which
tend to be more effective, but also outlining how they will address the
potential disadvantages of
approaches which have been identified as less effective, such as using
teaching assistants for
intensive one-to-one support, rather than as general classroom help. A
typical example of this is
Longfield Academy in Kent [S8], which allocated about £180,000 between
2011-13, and developed
its plan based on Toolkit guidance. The Academy does not have any direct
links with Durham
University, EEF or the Sutton Trust. Overall this indicates that the
Toolkit has made a clear and
distinctive contribution to schools and has had a direct impact on their
spending of the Pupil
Premium and their priorities for supporting their disadvantaged pupils.
Impact on the Media and on politics: the Toolkit has been widely
reported in the educational
media with more than 20 articles in online newspapers, professional
journals and magazines, such
as the Guardian Online, Times Educational Supplement, The House,
Headteacher Update,
Governing Matters, Teaching Leaders and Primary Headship. It is
recommended on the websites
of more than 20 educational organisations, from charities such as the
Campaign for Learning, to
publishers such as Pearson and Oxford University Press, including
endorsements from influential
bodies like the Association of School and College Leaders and the National
Association of
Headteachers [S9]. It has also been acknowledged in the House of Commons
as a helpful
summary of approaches to narrow the gap between rich and poor (28th
June, 2012, 143WH) and in
the Welsh Assembly by the Minister for Education and Skills, (01/05/2013,
17.29 pm) as "clear
evidence of what really works in terms of turning around performance". The
success of the Toolkit
has influenced the Sutton Trust's commissioning of research, such as their
evidence review to
create a `Higher Education Access Toolkit' in 2012. In June 2013 the
Toolkit was awarded an
`Inspiration for Government Award' by the The Institute for Government
(IfG), which is an
independent charity and think tank with funding from the Gatsby
Foundation, promoting more
effective government with cross-party support [S10].
Sources to corroborate the impact
S1. EEF website and the Toolkit: http://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/toolkit/
The evidence analysis is updated annually and links to the EEF's
research and evaluation
projects.
S2. EEF Annual Report 2012:
http://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/uploads/pdf/Annual_Report_2011-12.pdf
"The
Sutton Trust-EEF Teaching and Learning Toolkit is our primary means of
disseminating
knowledge of what works in education" (page 19).
S3. Government announcement of the evidence centres (4/3/2013):
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-world-leading-evidence-centres-to-drive-better-decisions-across-200bn-of-public-services.
S4. Letter from the Chief Executive of the Education Endowment
Foundation.
S5. Ofsted (2012) The Pupil Premium: How schools are using the
Pupil Premium funding to
raise achievement for disadvantaged pupils September 2012, No. 120197
Ofsted London:
http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/pupil-premium
(page 11).
S6. In 2012 the Suffolk LA website providing the Toolkit to
Schools stated: "The Sutton Trust
have published excellent independent guidance on the resources that
improve attainment for
disadvantaged pupils. It is in the form of a toolkit on what works,
drawing on research
evidence and linking this to a cost benefit analysis." The updated
website points to the current
version of the Toolkit available through the EEF:
http://www.suffolklearning.co.uk/content.asp?did=6728
Other similar LA websites pointing
schools to the Toolkit or indicating LA endorsement have been identified
for Barnet, Bradford,
Bristol, Derby, East Sussex, Gloucestershire, Harringay, Kent,
Leicestershire, Medway,
Northumberland, Shropshire, Staffordshire, Wiltshire, Wolverhampton and
York.
S7. NFER Report commissioned by the Sutton Trust:
http://www.suttontrust.com/research/nfer-teacher-voice-omnibus/
S8. Longfield Academy website and rationale for spending
allocation based on the Toolkit:
http://www.longfieldacademy.org/aboutus/pupil-premium.php.
S9. NAHT endorsement of the toolkit: http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/news-and-media/key-topics/funding/naht-welcomes-advice-on-targeting-funds-for-disadvantaged-pupils/
S10. The Institute for Government award: http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/inspiration-government-award.