Pupil Mobility

Print View

Birmingham LEA

Birmingham is a major city with over a million inhabitants. It has areas of great affluence, but many more of considerable poverty and overall indices of disadvantage are much higher than those found nationally. The proportion of pupils entitled to free school meals is nearly double the national average and over half of Birmingham schools have more than a third of their pupils eligible. The number of pupils moving between schools within the school year is high, particularly in primary schools with an average turnover rate in 1999/2000 of 19%. A number of primary schools have turnover rates of between 30% and 50% and a few even exceed this.

The LEA and schools in Birmingham have responded to the challenge they face from high pupil turnover by compiling a wide ranging 'advice document' published by the Birmingham Advisory and Support Services (BASS - tel: 0121 303 8080).

The advice is the product of inter-agency research and discussion which showed:

• Most children who changed school frequently were at greater risk of underachieving, had poor attendance records, poorer concentration, were less motivated and more likely to have special educational needs than other children. They found it difficult to catch up when they changed schools, which often led to behavioural problems.
  
• For schools, a constantly changing pupil population causes problems with financial planning, the recruitment as well as deployment of staff and with the curriculum, teaching and learning. Much of the movement between schools is a result of family disturbances, violence and break-up which affects pupil attendance, concentration and attitude to work.
  
• Areas of the city with the highest rates of mobility have a preponderance of short-term, temporary accommodation, short tenancies, limited housing choice for growing families, limited local employment opportunities, high levels of dissatisfaction with the quality of life in the area and a high incidence of family breakdown.
  
• This is not a problem the education service alone can deal with.

Target setting

In a section titled 'Mobility and external tests' the advice given on interpreting results for a much changed cohort is:

"Schools with significant levels of pupil mobility are often disadvantaged when performance tables of national tests and GCSE results are published. For these schools, target setting is also a difficult process." The following strategy enables such schools to evaluate their effectiveness more accurately:

• Calculate the number of pupils out of those eligible to take the tests who have been present for the entire key stage. This is the 'core group'.
  
• Calculate the percentage of pupils from this group who have achieved national expectation or above and compare with the school's overall percentage at these levels.
  
• Work out the average level gain for the whole core group from the results of the previous end of key stage tests or the baseline results. Do this for the whole cohort and compare.

Here is a worked example from a primary school:

Such analysis of test data indicates that when the school educates its pupils for an entire key stage its results are above the national average. In the performance tables, however, the school is in the bottom 50% and appears to be doing a mediocre job for its pupils. Furthermore, the school's targets when taking the cohort as a whole were not met but, when looking at the core group only, they were exceeded.

A secondary school has analysed its 5+ A*-C GCSE grades for summer 2000. In 2000 66% of the pupils had been at the school from Year 7. 37% of these pupils achieved 5+ A*-C grades. 34% of the pupils had started later than Year 7. 10% of these pupils achieved 5+ A*-C grades. The overall 5+ A*-C grades for 2000 was 28%. As with the primary school example, this school is affected negatively by the performance tables. Analysis of targets for 5+ A*-C GCSE grades for 2001 indicates an even larger difference between those pupils starting in Year 7 and later starters.

Schools are also advised to:

• 'baseline' all pupils on entry and get a level fix where possible. 'Level' all pupils on exit if they leave before the end of a key stage;
  
• analyse movements in target figures and look at the correlation with mobility figures;
  
• analyse attendance figures to show pupils actually on roll compared with figures including those still waiting to be removed officially;
  
• provide a migration report highlighting the length of time a child has been in school (e.g. a school was able to show recently that 71% of a class had been in school less than 12 months);
  
• ensure that all relevant staff understand the information, e.g. can your SENCO interpret the mobility element?
  
• use mobility figures as part of your school's benchmarking information - compare your results with schools which have a similar level of pupil turnover;
  
• analyse past test (GCSE/GNVQ) data in terms of core group and whole cohort to show underlying trends in achievement by your school;
  
• develop a pupil mobility policy to include the above practice.

The wider context

BASS's advice document sets a much wider context than target setting alone. Recommendations are made for development of systems and other processes in the LEA, schools and other agencies.

For schools, advice is given on:

• what can be done when mobility has been caused by family crisis;
• initial strategies for first contact, induction and parent support;
  
• staff development and INSET;
  
• behaviour Policy;
  
• in class organisation;
  
• funding arrangements; and
• links with the local community.

There is more detailed advice on many of these points for primary schools and further advice for secondary schools on the roles of the full range of staff. A final section summarises the best practice for governing bodies.

back to top ^