Tutoring

Schools ‘don’t really know’ if tutoring is working, Ofsted finds

School inspectorate says most schools had not been assessing tuition effectively

School inspectorate says most schools had not been assessing tuition effectively

The NTP programme should be extended, a new Sutton Trust report suggests

Most headteachers don’t know if tutoring of pupils through the government’s flagship catch-up scheme is working, an Ofsted evaluation has found.

The inspectorate has published an independent review of the second year of the National Tutoring Programme, when it was run by Randstad.  

After visits to 63 schools last academic year, it has shared emerging findings with the Department for Education. But inspectors previously insisted it would never be “tuition compliance police”.

It follows an evaluation of NTP year 1 which found it “failed” to achieve its “intended focus” on helping disadvantaged pupils catch up.

Chief inspector Amanda Spielman said while there is evidence of tuition working effectively, “most” schools “lack a system to assess it properly so do not know if that’s the case”. 

A DfE spokesperson said evidence “highlights the positive impact that tutoring is having on both pupils’ attainment and confidence”.

Here’s what you need to know… 

1. Tutoring progress not being assessed

Ofsted said that although teachers suggested pupils’ confidence had increased, they found schools “generally had not yet developed efficient means to assess pupils’ progress” from tutoring.

Although assessment was “still in its infancy” during Ofsted’s research, 13 of the schools had not considered methods of measuring its effectiveness at all.

Instead they relied on “individuals’ perceptions” to determine whether it is having an impact. Also, changes to the NTP meant some tutoring was only just starting in summer 2022. 

Ofsted said in schools with “weakest” tuition provision, assessment was often “an afterthought” due to the “lack of contact time” the school had with the tutor. 

The inspectorate said that “leaders do not really know if tutoring is working”.

But some schools were using existing summative tests to monitor progress. Others with clearer assessment systems were often those with a “strong curriculum offer”. 

2. Haphazard and ad hoc ‘bolt on’

Overall, the schools Ofsted visited tended to follow DfE’s guidance when planning their tutoring strategy. Tutoring was “strong” in over half of the schools.

But in 10 schools, tutoring was “haphazard and poorly planned” with “no systemic approach” to tutoring, resulting in “poor implementation”. 

Ofsted said sometimes this led to tutoring resembling other types of intervention or simply seen as a “bolt-on” to classes. Workload was also a barrier but Ofsted said there was a “fundamental misunderstanding” of how to make tutoring successful.

For instance, in 17 schools it was common to have tuition groups of eight pupils or more, despite evidence saying the threshold should be six or seven before it starts to be ineffective. 

Schools with the weakest tutoring provision kept pupils in sessions for above the recommended 15-hours “often with little idea of whether attending was helping them”. 

3. Ofsted: Tutoring can’t work without ‘well-considered curriculum’

Inspectors said that tutoring “cannot really work without a well-considered and constructed curriculum in place”. 

Two approaches were usually associated with schools that already had a strong curriculum offer in place. These were teachers spotting concepts that pupils had not learned and were blocking them from catching up in class or identifying the right place in the sequence to start building the knowledge, rather than specific holes. 

Some were using tutoring as a “short-term fix” to help improve pupils’ immediate exam outcomes, but these were more “generic in content” to help students to “pass tests”. 

If the quality of tutoring was poor, this could “potentially lead to pupils maintaining misconceptions that may have longer term consequences”. 

Inspectors found the most effective tutors regularly collaborated with teachers to make sure sessions “were purposefully planned and aligned with the school’s curriculum”.

4. Qualified teachers enhance catch-up

Ofsted said the quality of tutoring was better where qualified teachers were involved. 

The weakest sessions were where training for non-qualified tutors had not been sufficient enough to “prepare them for the demands of teaching small groups”. 

But inspectors said due to the recruitment crisis, it wasn’t surprising that secondary schools opting to use the school-led tutoring route tended to use qualified teaching staff already in post.

Often in schools with a “strong culture” among staff that “all pupils would catch up”, teachers volunteered their time to provide tuition. 

In primary schools, it was harder to recruit teachers from internal staff because more tutoring happened during the school day – rather than after school.

A third had recruited teaching assistants for these roles, but often alongside recruitment of qualified teachers. 

But Ofsted said while TAs knew pupils, the subject knowledge of non-qualified tutors “was sometimes limited”.

5. ‘Concern’ on tutoring during school day

Three quarters of schools held tutoring sessions during regular lesson times, which was more common in primary schools. Sessions before and after school, and at weekends, were more common in secondaries. 

Ofsted said it was “concerned” that holding tutoring sessions during the school day could mean pupils fall further behind elsewhere. Leaders in a fifth of schools had not “thought through the risks of disrupting children’s learning by taking them out of regular classes”.

But primary school leaders said they had no other option. Reasons included staff workload and pressure from parents about school pick-up times.

At secondary, leaders said getting students to attend morning or weekend sessions was “not straightforward”. Ofsted said a few leaders were “more forthright in their communications”. 

“They stated that ‘tutoring is the type of additional support that rich kids get’ and were clear in highlighting to their pupils (and their parents) that they ‘were getting it for free’.”

6. Randstad issues pushed schools to direct route

The two original arms of the NTP – tuition partners and academic mentors – were overseen by Randstad in year two.

Ofsted said issues with these routes “prompted most leaders” to select the new school-led tutoring approach. 

As Schools Week has reported, schools said the “administrative burden” in sourcing tutoring was challenging. Leaders also felt “distanced” from the recruitment process and concerned about tutoring quality led schools to change their approach. 

In a few cases, tutors had started sessions but their employment was terminated after only a couple of weeks. This was because leaders’ internal quality assurance checks had highlighted the tutor’s work was not up to their required standard.

But where schools were using tuition partners when inspectors visited, staff tended to be more positive.

Schools criticised the availability and quality of academic mentors.

For instance, in one school, leaders said that the tuition given by one academic mentor was of such poor quality that they had to instruct other staff to re-teach the pupils involved.

Latest education roles from

Lecturer in Sports & Uniformed Public Services

Lecturer in Sports & Uniformed Public Services

Bournemouth and Poole College

Engineering and Welding Apprenticeship Trainer

Engineering and Welding Apprenticeship Trainer

MidKent College

Consultant and Senior Consultant, Schools and Academy Trusts

Consultant and Senior Consultant, Schools and Academy Trusts

Peridot Partners

Early Years and Education Lecturer

Early Years and Education Lecturer

Riverside College

Learning Support Assistant and Midday Supervisor

Learning Support Assistant and Midday Supervisor

Forest Academy

Higher Level Teaching Assistant

Higher Level Teaching Assistant

Foxfield Primary School

Sponsored posts

Sponsored post

How tailored coaching training can transform whole-school cultures

Sophie Enstone, Assistant Principal Learning and Teaching, Goffs Academy, shares her perspective on her coaching journey, how it’s been...

SWAdvertorial
Sponsored post

Catch Up® Early Years research project has a positive impact on younger learners in Literacy and Numeracy.

Catch Up® has recently concluded a 3-year Early Years research project. The project sought to develop and trial...

SWAdvertorial
Sponsored post

National competition – can your students solve the ocean plastics crisis?

University College London launches fully resourced national schools competition to tackle ocean plastics.

SWAdvertorial
Sponsored post

EUK Education – helping you inspire, educate, and inform students on STEM and career paths

EUK Education is the new home for all your STEM education and careers needs. Loaded with quality curriculum-linked programmes,...

SWAdvertorial

More from this theme

Tutoring

Just 1 in 6 schools to offer tutoring after NTP, research suggests

Tutoring 'heavily reliant' on the availability of ring fenced funding, NFER research found

Samantha Booth
Tutoring

A ‘vibrant tutor market’? Providers wind down as NTP closes

Tutoring providers scale down as the flagship catch-up scheme closes

Samantha Booth
Tutoring

Over 4 in 10 schools snub tutoring in final year of subsidies

Course starts likely halved in last year of subsidies for flagship catch-up programme

Freddie Whittaker
Tutoring

Tutoring: Another £1m saved as mentor scheme axed early

Demand has dropped for mentors with only a fifth of the target reached last year

Samantha Booth

Your thoughts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *