One of the boldest and most ambitious responses to the disruption caused by the pandemic was introducing state-funded tutoring. The schemes launched during that tumultuous time have helped thousands of young people catch up on lost learning, and there is a strong evidence base to support the efficacy of this intervention.
The lessons from the National Tutoring Programme (NTP) and the 16-19 Tuition Fund (16-19TF) should not be consigned to the past.
In December, Labour’s senior cabinet office minister, Pat McFadden called for the public sector to adopt a “test-and-learn” approach, similar to those seen in start-ups.
Well, we have tested and learnt from the rollout of state-funded tutoring as a method for closing the attainment gap. This week, these crucial insights have been published in a report by Public First.
Between 2020 and 2024, NTP and 16-19TF provided over six million tutoring sessions, surpassing all expectations in terms of their scale and reach. During this time, the gap in access to tuition between rich and poor families in England all but disappeared.
We already had clear evidence that tutoring is a high-impact and cost-effective academic intervention and, despite challenges in evaluation, both teachers and parents observed its positive effects. Teachers noted that tutoring not only boosted students’ confidence but also enhanced classroom engagement and reduced anxiety.
That said, both national schemes were far from perfect. As we reflect on the legacy of state-funded tutoring, there are critical lessons that must inform any future tutoring offer for young people.
The unprecedented nature of the pandemic allowed tutoring to be mobilised quickly at a time when policymakers were looking for solutions to lost learning. But this speed became a challenge to implementing and embedding these programmes for the long term.
While earlier research from Public First showed significant support for tutoring from pupils, parents and teachers, there were rightly frustrations from the latter as to how tutoring was delivered in schools and colleges. Constant changes to the delivery model over the course of the four years certainly did not help this.
We know that the challenges of Covid learning loss have not gone away. The attainment gap is wider than ever, school and college absences have skyrocketed and we face a crisis in the mental health and wellbeing of our young people.
Tutoring should be a permanent feature of our education system
Tutoring should not be treated as a short-term fix but as a permanent feature of our education system. For organisations like ours, which are focused on addressing the impact of socioeconomic disadvantage on educational achievement, the aim should be to close the attainment gap between disadvantaged young people and their peers.
To do this effectively, tutoring must be made available across all age groups. The evidence for its effectiveness is strong at every key stage, not just for pupils sitting exams. Embedding tutoring from Key Stage 1 through to post-16 would enable timely, targeted support at the moments young people need it most.
Alongside this, a national programme will require a proportionate system of quality assurance. We need a framework that ensures high standards across the board, but which doesn’t create unnecessary bureaucracy for already overstretched colleges and schools.
Tutoring must be delivered in a way that reflects the evidence. That means one-to-one or small group sessions, focused on core subjects such as English and maths, and delivered for a minimum of 12 hours per course. Anything less risks undermining its impact.
Finally, and most crucially, we need sustainable and dedicated funding to support tutoring provision. Without financial certainty, schools and colleges cannot plan ahead or integrate tutoring into their core provision. This caused serious issues throughout the NTP and 16-19 TF. Funding should be ring-fenced to avoid this ambiguity in future.
Since these schemes ended, many schools and colleges have expressed a desire to continue providing tutoring support. However, schools have reported that it is unrealistic to sustain this through Pupil Premium funding alone.
Furthermore, no equivalent funding exists for 16–18-year-olds in the final years of compulsory education. This makes it extremely difficult for colleges to implement targeted interventions to help students catch up. Introducing a 16–19 student premium would be a significant step toward addressing this gap in further education settings.
The report released today presents a clear and compelling blueprint for a well-designed, state-supported tutoring programme. The country’s disadvantage gap is enduring at all key stages, and still wider than it was pre-pandemic. A sustained national intervention to improve outcomes for our most disadvantaged young people is therefore urgently needed.
We must not waste the valuable lessons learned over the past five years. Nor should we wait for another crisis before we take action.
Tutoring is not just an emergency response; it should be a permanent fixture in our efforts to address educational disadvantage. The case for tutoring is already clear, the challenge now is whether we have the ambition to deliver it.
