A recent survey conducted by Ofsted has highlighted continuing concerns about EAL funding. As one respondent put it: ‘FSM is only one indicator of deprivation/inequality. Additional funding for those who have EAL, no English at all, are new arrivals to England and/or move in and out of schools regularly would be extremely useful to help ensure that resources are not over-stretched.’
Comments about the teaching and support needs of EAL learners uncovered in the recent survey have gone largely unreported due to the focus on the headline results of the survey showing that only 10% of schools felt that the pupil premium was having a "significant" effect on disadvantaged pupils.
The Pupil Premium was introduced in April 2011. In 2012–13 schools were allocated a total of £1.25 billion funding for children from low-income families who were eligible for free school meals, looked after children and those from families with parents in the Armed Forces. The aim of this survey was to identify how schools were using this money to raise achievement and improve outcomes for these pupils. The survey is based on the views of 262 school leaders gathered through inspections and telephone interview questionnaires conducted by Her Majesty’s Inspectors.
Around a third of the 119 school leaders who took part in the telephone interview questionnaire felt that the Pupil Premium was not an effective way of targeting those where inequality is a concern. Typically these school leaders 'saw the arrangements in 2011–12 as ‘crude’ or ‘simplistic’, failing to capture those pupils who would benefit most. These schools said that some families miss out because they are just above the threshold. Some schools argued that other factors, such as family background and home environment were better indicators of need' . (p23) School leaders also noted ‘There are gap groups who are not eligible for FSM – migrant workers, very low income and those on the cusp of working hours.’
